UC-NRLF 


J         4 


i 


m 


LIBRARY 

OF  THK 

University  of  California. 


GIFT    OF 


Class 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2007  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/commentaryonepisOObenjricli 


THE  BIBLE  FOR  HOME  AND  SCHOOL 
SHAILER  MATHEWS,  General  Editor 

PROFESSOR  OF  HISTORICAL  AND  COMPARATIVE  THEOLOGY 
THE   UNIVERSITY   OF  CHICAGO 


GALATIANS 

BENJAMIN   W.   BACON 


THE  BIBLE    FOR   HOME    AND    SCHOOL 

SHAILER   MATHEWS,  General  Editor 


GENESIS 

By  Professor  H.  G.  Mitchell 
ACTS 

By  Professor  George  H.  Gilbert 
HEBREWS 

By  Professor  E.  J.  Goodspeed 
GALATIANS 

By  Professor  B.  W.  Bacon 

VOLUMES  IN  PREPARATION 
I   SAMUEL 

By  Professor  L.  W.  Batten 
PSALMS 

By  Reverend  J.  P.  Peters 
ISAIAH 

By  Professor  John  E.  McFadyen 
JUDGES 

By  Professor  Edward  L.  Curtis 
JOB 

By  Professor  George  A.  Barton 
AMOS,    ROSEA,   AND    MICAH 

By  Professor  J.  M.  P.  Smith 
MARK 

By  Professor  M.  W.  Jacobus 
JOHN 

By  Professor  Shailer  Mathews 
ROMANS 

By  Professor  E.  I.  Bosworth 
EPHESIANS  AND   COLOSSI ANS 

By  Reverend  Gross  Alexander 


THE  BIBLE  FOR  HOME  AND  SCHOOL 
^i'hle^    AJ-T.    Qalai  l&y^f,^  ^ujli^l 

COMMENTARY 

ON 

THE  EPISTLE  OF  PAUL  TO  THE 
GALATIANS 


BY 
BENJAMIN   W.  BACON,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

BUCKINGHAM  PROFESSOR  OF  NEW  TESTAMENT  CRITICISM   AND 
EXEGESIS   IN   YALE  UNIVERSITY 


I 


THE   MACMILLAN   COMPANY 
1909 

AU  rights  reserved 


^3 


Copyright,  1909, 
By  the  MACMILLAN  COMPANY. 


Set  up  and  electrotyped.     Published  September,  1909. 


J.  8.  Gushing  Co.  —  Berwick  «&  Smith  Co. 
Norwood,  Mass.,  U.S.A. 


^ 


GENERAL    INTRODUCTION 

The  Bible  for  Home  and  School  is  intended  to  place 
the  results  of  the  best  modern  biblical  scholarship  at  the 
disposal  of  the  general  reader.  It  does  not  seek  to  dupli- 
cate other  commentaries  to  which  the  student  must  turn. 
Its  chief  characteristics  are  (a)  its  rigid  exclusion  of  all 
processes,  both  critical  and  exegetical,  from  its  notes ; 
{b)  its  presupposition  and  its  use  of  the  assured  results 
of  historical  investigation  and  criticism  wherever  such 
results  throw  light  on  the  biblical  text;  (c)  its  running 
analysis  both  in  text  and  comment ;  {d)  its  brief  explana- 
tory notes  adapted  to  the  rapid  reader;  {e)  its  thorough 
but  brief  Introductions  ;  (/)  its  use  of  the  Revised  Version 
of  1881,  supplemented  with  all  important  renderings  in 
other  versions. 

Biblical  science  has  progressed  rapidly  during  the  past 
few  years,  but  the  reader  still  lacks  a  brief,  comprehensive 
commentary  that  shall  extend  to  him  in  usable  form  mate- 
rial now  at  the  disposition  of  the  student.  It  is  hoped 
that  in  this  series  the  needs  of  intelligent  Sunday  School 
teachers  have  been  met,  as  well  as  those  of  clergymen 
and  lay  readers,  and  that  in  scope,  purpose,  and  loyalty 
to  the  Scriptures  as  a  foundation  of  Christian  thought  and 
life,  its  volumes  will  stimulate  the  intelligent  use  of  the 
Bible  in  the  home  and  the  school. 


CONTENTS 

PAGB 

Introduction i 

I.    Text i 

II.    Canonicity 4 

III.  Authorship 7 

IV.  Relation  to  the  Story  of  Paul  in  Acts   .  11 
V.    To  WHOM  Galatians  was  Written       .        .  17 

1.  The  Churches  of  Galatia     ....  18 

2.  The  North  Galatian  Theory        ...  20 

3.  The  Pauline  Geography      ....  24 
VI.    Date  and  Occasion  of  the  Letter      .        .  25 

1.  Relation  of  Galatians  to  Romans         .         .  26 

2.  Internal  Indications    .....  29 

3.  The  Judaizers  and  their  Success  among  the 

Galatians         ......  33 

4.  The  Historical  Order  of  Events  in  Paul's 

Missionary  Career 38 

VII.    Analysis  of  the  Epistle        ....  41 

VIII.     Bibliography 43 

Text  and  Commentary 47 

Appended  Notes 113 

A.  The  Content  of  Paul's  Gospel    .         .         -US 

B.  The  Jerusalem  Compact,  and  the  Apostolic 

Decrees 118 

C.  Justification  by  Faith,  "Apart  from  "  Works 

of  Law 129 

Index 133 

vii 

235418 


INTRODUCTION 

I.  Text 

Although  from  the  very  outset  the  Epistle  to  the  Gala- 
tians  was  adapted  for  circulation  among  a  number  of 
"churches"  (i :  2),  we  have  no  traces  of  it  in  separate  form, 
and  can  merely  infer  from  the  better  acquaintance  of  the 
very  earliest  writers  such  as  Luke  ^  and  Clement  of  Rome 
{ca.  95  A.D.)  with  Romans,  First  Corinthians,  and  Ephesians, 
that  there  was  a  period  extending  approximately  to  no  a.d. 
during  which  the  letters  of  Paul  circulated  as  individual 
writings.  Those  addressed  to  the  remoter  churches  would 
thus  be  less  widely  known.  Books  had  at  this  time  the  form 
of  volumina,  or  scrolls  of  papyrus,  and  could  not  well  be 
made  to  include  so  extensive  a  work  as  the  whole  series  of 
Pauline  Epistles.  Still,  so  early  as  the  time  of  Ignatius  and 
Polycarp  (110-117  a.d.)  these  are  referred  to  as  "the 
letters  of  Paul,"  and  assumed  to  be  current  as  a  body  of 
writings  by  study  of  which  the  churches  may  be  "built  up." 
In  fact  the  first  canon  of  Christian  writings  of  which  we  have 
definite  information,  set  up  about  145  a.d.  by  Marcion,  the 
great  leader  of  the  anti- Jewish  Gnostic  heresy,  consisted  of 
two  parts,  a  "Gospel"  adapted  from  our  Luke,  and  an 
"Apostle"  which  began  with  Galatians  and  included  all  the 
other  letters  of  Paul  save  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  By  the  end 
of  the  second  century  it  was  considered  quite  axiomatic  that 
"the  Apostle  Paul  himself  following  the  example  of  his 
predecessor  John"  should  have  ''written  by  name  to  seven 
churches  only,  in  this  order :  First  to  the  Corinthians,  second 

'  In  giving  this  traditional  name  to  the  author  of  the  third  Gospel  and  book  of  Acts 
the  present  writer  does  not  wish  to  be  understood  as  admitting  the  full  validity  of  the 
jtradition. 


«  « INTRODUCTION 


to  the;  Ephcsi.ari(),;  th?rd  to  the  Philippians,  fourth  to  the 
Colossians,  fifth  to  the  Galatians,  sixth  to  the  Thessalo- 
nians,  seventh  to  the  Romans."  ^ 

The  earliest  extant  texts  of  Galatians  belong  to  a  period 
two  centuries  later  still,  and  happen  to  be  included  in 
copies  of  the  entire  Greek  Bible  of  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments. For  by  400  a.d.  these  writings  were  easily  com- 
prised between  the  covers  of  a  single  codex,  or  ''  book  "  of  the 
modern  form.  However,  we  also  have  codices  of  later  date 
which  comprise  the  Pauline  Epistles  only,  showing  that 
these  still  also  circulated  as  a  separate  literary  unit. 

The  great  codices  of  about  400  a.d.,  designated  Aleph 
and  B,  or  the  Sinai  tic  and  Vatican  Bibles,  present  some- 
what divergent  forms  of  the  type  of  text  current  in  Alex- 
andria about  200-400  A.D.,  and  this  type  is  also  represented, 
though  in  a  form  showing  systematic  emendation,  by  the 
fragmentary  rewritten  Codex  C,  or  Ephraem  Syrus,  of 
about  500  A.D.,  which  fortunately  contains  all  but  the  first 
nineteen  verses  of  Galatians.  Of  similar  type  are  the  frag- 
ments of  the  so-called  Cod.  Coislinianus  (H)  at  Peters- 
burg and  Mt.  Athos,  containing  respectively  Gal.  i  :  4-10; 
2  :  9-14,  and  i  :  1-4;  2  :  14-17;  4  :  30-5  :  5.  With  these 
may  be  grouped  as  partially  "Alexandrian"  the  ninth  cen- 
tury codices  of  Acts,  Catholic  Epistles  and  Pauhne  Epistles, 
designated  respectively  Cod.  Angelicus  (L)  and  Cod.  Por- 
phyrianus  (P),  the  latter  including  also  Revelation. 

A  different,  less  carefully  revised,  type  of  text,  very  im- 
properly designated  "Western,"  is  represented,  for  the 
Pauline  Epistles  only,  by  the  sixth  century,  bilingual  (Greek 
and  Latin  in  parallel  columns),  Codex  Claromontanus  (D), 
and  by  a  group  of  three  similar  bilinguals  of  the  ninth  cen- 
tury, Petropolitanus  or  Sangermanensis  (E),  Augiensis  (F), 
and  Boernerianus  (G) ;  but  of  these  E  is  only  an  unintelli- 
gent transcript  of  D,  and  has  no  independent  value. 

Codex  Alexandrinus  (A),  in  the  British  Museum,  an  entire 

'  Muratorian  Fragment,  200-210  A.D.  The  author  conceives  of  the  seven  letters  of 
Rev.  1-3  a^  written  before  the  Pauline  Epistles. 

Z 


INTRODUCTION 


Greek  Bible,  is  earlier  in  date  than  any  of  the  foregoing 
save  Aleph  and  B,  but  represents  a  later  type  of  text  than 
either  the  Alexandrian  or  Western;  for  while  the  copyist 
possessed  a  less  altered  exemplar  for  the  Pauline  Epistles 
than  for  the  four  Gospels,  it  still  shows  a  blending  of  Alex- 
andrian with  Western  readings.  C  and  the  secondary  un- 
cials L  and  P  are  often  found  in  agreement  with  A;  but 
readings  thus  attested  are  usually  of  late  origin,  and  are 
called  "Syrian."  Finally  there  will  soon  be  available  a 
valuable  though  fragmentary  manuscript  of  the  Pauline 
Epistles  and  Hebrews  belonging  to  the  fifth  or  sixth  century, 
brought  to  America  from  Egypt  by  Charles  L.  Freer,  Esq., 
in  1907.  Its  type  of  text  cannot  be  fully  determined  until 
its  appearance  in  the  promised  edition  in  photographic  fac- 
simile, but  it  is  said  to  contain  "Syrian"  as  well  as  "Alex- 
andrian" readings. 

There  is  also  available  for  determination  of  the  text  of 
the  Pauline  Epistles  some  further  evidence,  i.  That  of  the 
cursive  or  small  letter  manuscripts  of  the  tenth  and  later 
centuries,  some  of  which  show  from  their  readings  that 
they  were  copied  from  really  ancient  exemplars.  2.  That 
of  the  various  early  translations  into  Egyptian,  Syriac,  Ar- 
menian, and  Latin.  3.  That  of  a  multitude  of  quotations 
by  Greek  and  Latin  fathers  of  the  Church.  When  it  is 
possible,  as  it  frequently  is,  to  determine  which  of  several 
variant  readings  these  translators  or  fathers  had  before  them, 
we  are  enabled  to  say  in  general  what  type  of  text  was  cur- 
rent in  Egypt,  in  Syria  and  Greece,  or  in  Italy,  North  Africa, 
and  Gaul  so  early  even  as  the  latter  part  of  the  second  cen- 
tury. We  can  even  measure  pretty  closely  the  degree  of 
variation,  and  establish  many  individual  readings. 

The  impression  apt  to  be  produced  by  the  very  magni- 
tude of  the  material  at  command  for  determination  of  the 
New  Testament  text,  and  the  prodigious  pains  taken  by 
generations  of  scholars  to  determine  the  origin  and  value  of 
each  minutest  variation,  is  an  impression  of  uncertainty,  as 
though  it  were  difficult  to  be  sure  exactly  what  the  authors 

3 


INTRODUCTION 


wrote.  The  logical  impression  should  be  just  the  contrary. 
The  real  result  is  to  make  this  text  incomparably  more  ex- 
act and  trustworthy  than  that  of  any  other  writing  of  equal 
antiquity  in  the  whole  domain  of  literature.  The  changes 
of  the  R.  V.  of  1881  from  the  A.  V.  of  161 1  exhibit  about 
the  maximum  difference  between  a  wholly  uncritical,  cor- 
rupt text  and  a  thoroughly  scientific  one.  From  a  compari- 
son of  these  the  reader  will  see  to  how  slight  an  extent  the 
real  substance  of  the  writing  is  affected  by  textual  criticism. 
We  may  safely  say,  The  difference  between  the  text  of  Gala- 
tians  as  it  left  the  hand  of  Paul's  amanuensis  and  as  it  ap- 
pears to-day  in  any  modern  Greek  New  Testament  is  not 
greater  than  the  difference  between  our  Authorized  and  our 
Revised  Version  as  a  whole. 


II.  Canonicity 

The  process  of  canonization  was  of  the  utmost  value  in 
the  preservation  of  the  text  from  corruption.  We  have 
seen  that  so  early  as  145  a.d.  ten  of  the  principal  epistles  of 
Paul  were  formed  into  a  true  "canon"  or  collection  of 
writings  treated  as  sacred  and  authoritative  "scripture" 
suitable  for  public  reading  in  the  churches.  The  anticipa- 
tion of  the  ecclesiastical  process  thus  noted  in  the  case  of 
the  Gnostic  Marcion  was  due  to  his  pecuHar  anti-Judaistic 
doctrine,  which  utterly  rejected  the  Old  Testament,  and 
magnified  Paul's  quarrel  with  the  Galilean  apostles.  Hav- 
ing thrown  overboard  the  "sacred  scriptures"  of  the  Church, 
without  being  able  to  remove  the  need  supplied  in  both 
Synagogue  and  Church  by  the  use  of  these  writings,  Mar- 
cion was  the  more  rapidly  driven  along  the  course  on  whose 
first  stages  the  Church  had  already  entered.  For  even  be- 
fore Marcion,  as  we  have  seen.  Church  leaders  like  Clement 
of  Rome  (95  a.d.)  and  Ignatius  (110-117  a.d.)  were  already 
making  use  of  individual  letters,  and  Polycarp  (110-117  a.d.) 
was  even  commending  a  corpus  Paulinum  to  the  churches, 
as  the  standard  of  apostolic  doctrine,  and  a  means  of  edifica- 

4 


INTRODUCTION 


tion.  Indeed  while  we  must  admit  that  the  actual  canoni- 
zation of  any  individual  writing  was  a  process  of  slow 
growth  in  the  Church,  extending  over  many  generations, 
and  the  determination  of  the  precise  limits  of  the  canon  so 
much  slower  still  as  to  be  not  wholly  complete  in  our  own 
day,  nevertheless,  there  is  a  sense  in  which  we  may  say  of 
the  Pauline  Epistles  that  they  were  "canonical"  from  the 
very  outset.  Not  that  Paul  had  any  idea  of  their  being 
collected  and  attached  to  the  sacred  rolls  of  the  Law  and 
the  Prophets,  which  he  quotes  with  such  reverence  as  the 
word  of  God;  but  that  he  was  saturated,  dominated,  and 
controlled  by  the  idea  that  his  whole  life  was  "inspired." 
If  of  his  life  in  general  he  could  say,  "  It  is  no  more  I  that 
live,  but  Christ  that  liveth  in  me,"  how  much  more  the  Gos- 
pel which  came  to  him  by  "revelation  of  the  Lord,"  the 
"visions  and  revelations"  in  which  he  heard  "words  that 
are  not  lawful  to  utter,"  caught  away  into  the  third  heaven 
and  not  knowing  whether  he  was  "in  the  body  or  out  of 
the  body"?  Paul  beUeved  that  his  very  word  of  anathema 
was  enough  to  bring  death  upon  an  offending  member 
(i  Cor.  5:5).  He  knew  he  "spoke  with  tongues  more 
than  they  all"  (i  Cor.  14  :  18);  he  had  done  the  signs  of 
an  apostle  in  miracles  and  wonders  of  healing  by  direct  en- 
dowment of  the  Spirit  (Rom.  15  :  18,  19;  2  Cor.  12  :  12); 
and  he  believed  that  when  he  gave  advice,  even  unsup- 
ported by  any  express  "word  of  the  Lord,"  he  also  had 
"the  Spirit  of  God"  (i  Cor.  7  :  40).  If  even  a  Clement 
could  look  upon  his  own  letter  (lix)  as  "words  spoken  by 
God  through  us,"  and  an  Ignatius  his  own  utterance  as 
"God's  own  voice"  {To  the  PhiladelpJiians,vii),  surely  such 
a  "  chosen  vessel "  of  the  Spirit  as  Paul  was  justified,  in  the 
conviction  of  that  earlier  and  still  more  enthusiastic  age,  in 
regarding  his  weighty  letters  as  conveying  "what  the  Spirit 
saith  unto  the  churches."  In  a  true  sense  it  is  with  these 
letters,  carefully  and  laboriously  constructed  as  they  are, 
notwithstanding  their  volcanic  fervor  of  conviction,  that 
New  Testament  canonicity  begins.     Of  course  the  "words 

5 


INTRODUCTION 


of  the  Lord"  already  constitute  to  Paul  a  far  higher  stand- 
ard (i  Cor.  7  :  lo,  12;  i  Thess.  4  :  15;  cf.  1  Tim.  6:3); 
but,  little  as  Paul  would  seem  to  have  depended  on  it,  this 
very  tradition  of  the  Lord's  sayings  owes  to  none  other  than 
to  Paul  himself  so  much  of  the  reverence  with  which  it 
came  to  be  regarded  (i  Tim.  6  :  3  {ca.  90  a.d.)  ;  Poly- 
carp,  Philadelphians,  vii).  And  this  was  not  as  yet  a 
written  tradition.  That  the  process  should  ever  have  begun 
which  in  the  course  of  150  years  was  destined  to  place 
alongside  of  the  revered  Scriptures  of  "  the  Law,  the  Prophets, 
and  the  Psalms"  a  second  canon  of  "  Gospel,  Epistle,  and 
Apocalypse,"  ^  equal  or  even  superior  in  authority  to  the 
Old  Testament,  is  due  very  largely  to  the  intense  mysticism 
of  Paul.  For  Paul  was  convinced  that  he  himself  spoke 
"God's  wisdom  in  a  mystery,  even  the  wisdom  that  hath 
been  hidden,  foreordained  before  the  worlds  unto  our 
glory,"  unknown  to  even  the  angelic  and  demonic  "rulers 
of  the  world,"  and  revealed  only  by  the  indwelling  "mind 
of  Christ"  (i  Cor.  2  :  7-16).  The  greatest  step,  if  not  the 
very  first,  in  this  significant  process  of  the  formation  of  a 
Holy  Scripture  of  the  New  Testament  was  the  writing  of 
Paul's  circular  letter  "to  the  churches  of  Galatia,"  pour- 
ing out  his  whole  soul  in  passionate  defence  of  the  divine 
origin  of  his  apostleship  and  of  his  gospel.  Needless,  al- 
most, to  say,  since  the  time  when  Marcion  adopted  it  and 
made  it  the  foundation  stone  of  his  Apostolos,  it  has  never 
entered  the  mind  of  the  Church,  or  any  branch  of  it,  to 
question  the  standing  and  authority  thus  recognized  by 
common  consent.  The  occasional  objections  raised  since 
the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  by  a  few  extremists 
who  question  even  the  historical  existence  of  Jesus  and 
Paul,  have  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  the  canonicity  of 
the  writing.  This  is  a  matter  which  rests  upon  grounds 
independent  even  of  authenticity.  Canonicity  is  a  question 
for  the  Church  to  determine  on  the  basis  of  its  own  experi- 

»  Cf.  Justin  M.  Apol.  I.  vi.     "We  reverence  and  bow  to  God,  and  to  the  Son 
who  came  from  him  and  taught  us  these  things,  aa4  to  (he  prophetic  Spirit." 

6 


INTRODUCTION 


ence  of  benefit  to  its  spiritual  life;  and  this  question,  so  far 
as  Galatians  is  concerned,  passed  out  of  the  field  of  debate 
some  eighteen  centuries  ago;  or  more  strictly  speaking  has 
never  entered  it  at  all. 


III.  Authorship 

It  is  difficult  to  think  of  any  writing  of  antiquity  whose 
reputed  authorship  could  not  be  denied  with  greater  plausi- 
bility than  the  PauHne  authorship  of  Galatians.  But  just 
because  of  the  vital  issues  which  in  recent  times  have  been 
felt  to  hinge  upon  it,  the  attempt  has  been  made.  And  we 
may  be  thankful  that  it  has ;  because  the  complete  security 
of  the  writer's  claim  to  be  no  other  than  the  Apostle  Paul 
himself  (i  :  i,  17;  2  :  i,  7,  11;  6  :  11,  17)  is  thus  estab- 
lished by  processes  of  the  higher  criticism,  just  as  textual 
criticism  establishes  the  accuracy  of  the  text. 

It  is  true  that  Galatians  appears  to  be  somewhat  less 
widely  known  in  the  earliest  period  ^  than  First  Corinthians 
and  Romans,  but  as  the  most  morbid  hypercriticism  has 
never  soared  to  such  a  pitch  as  to  separate  the  three  epistles 
in  date  of  origin  by  more  than  about  a  decade,  even  when 
attributing  them  to  different  hands,^  the  existence  of  one 
clearly  implies  the  existence  of  the  other  two.  If  Gala- 
tians stood  alone,  we  should  be  confined  to  such  employ- 
ments of  it  in  the  letters  of  Ignatius  and  Polycarp  (iio- 
117  A.D.)  as  Lightfoot  {Commentary,  Introd.,  §  iv)  enumer- 
ates, and  those  in  a  writing  of  the  same  region  and  period, 
the  Gospel  of  John,^  to  prove  its  early  date.  We  might 
add  the  use  of  the  doctrine  of  the  new  birth  from  "  spiritual 
seed"  (Gal.  4  :  4-7,  28-31),  a  doctrine  which  not  only  re- 

'  For  one  reason  see  above,  p.  i.  Quite  probably  the  bitterly  polemic  character 
of  Galatians  and  2  Corinthians  prevented  their  attaining  general  circulation  so  early 
as  Romans,  i  Corinthians  and  Ephesians. 

»  R.  Steck,  Galaterbrief,  1888,  brought  forward  and  ably  advocated  a  theory  which 
made  all  the  Pauline  Epistles  spurious  products  of  the  second  century.  Galatians  was 
by  a  later  hand  than  Romans  and  Corinthians,  and  was  dependent  on  these  and  on 
Acts.    All  four,  however,  he  held  to  have  been  produced  between  120  and  130  a.d. 

3  With  Gal.  3  :  28-4  : 7,  cf.  Jn.  8  :  31-42.     . 


INTRODUCTION 


appears  in  the  Gospel  of  John/  but  also  in  First  Peter/ 
another  writing  of  this  region  almost  certainly  known  to 
Clement  of  Rome  (95  a.d.).  Against  this  it  might  be 
urged  that  the  author  of  Acts  seems  to  be  unacquainted 
with  our  Epistle,  and  the  same  is  possibly  true  of  his  con- 
temporary Clement.  It  must  also  be  admitted  that  Justin 
Martyr  (153-160  a.d.),  while  admittedly  showing  acquaint- 
ance with  several  Pauline  Epistles,  makes  comparatively 
little  use  of  them  as  authority.  But  Galatians  does  not 
stand  alone.  Evidence  for  First  Corinthians  and  Romans 
is  evidence  for  it  also.  Now  Clement  in  writing  to  the 
Corinthians  reminds  them  that  "the  blessed  Paul  the 
Apostle"  had  written  them  an  epistle  "in  the  beginning  of 
the  gospel,"  in  which  (xlvii,  cf.  i  Cor.  i  :  10-12)  "he 
charged  you  in  the  Spirit  concerning  himself  and  Cephas 
and  Apollos,  because  that  even  then  ye  had  made  parties." 
Clement  also  uses  Romans,  and  what  is  more,  employs  no 
less  than  forty-seven  times  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
which  also  uses  Romans,^  and  while  making  no  claims 
whatever  to  apostolicity  purports  to  be  written  at  a  time 
when  Timothy  was  still  in  active  service  (Heb.  13  :  23). 
Thus  by  the  use  of  external  evidence  only  we  are  carried 
back  to  the  period  of  Paul's  own  companions  and  helpers 
as  that  in  which  these  great  epistles  were  current,  which 
profess  to  be  written  by  him,  and  were  received  as  his  by 
the  churches  which  had  known  him  face  to  face. 

Internal  evidence  gives  even  more  decisive  evidence  in 
the  case  of  Galatians.  We  have  seen  above  how  the  lan- 
guage, style,  and  theological  standpoint  compel  its  ascription 
to  the  same  author  as  the  epistles  to  Rome  and  Corinth. 
Until  very  recent  times  its  whole  aspect  and  content,  together 
with  its  tone  of  ardent  sincerity,  protected  it  from  the 
faintest  whisper  of  suspicion.     Even  the  sweeping  proscrip- 

»  Jn.  I  :  11-13;    3  :  S-8. 

»  I  Pt.  I  :  23-25.  The  thought  is  reproduced  from  i  Peter  in  Jas.  i  :  i,  ii,  i8, 
but  the  Epistle  of  James  is  usually  regarded  as  later. 

3  Heb.  10  :  30  quotes  Dt.  32  :  35  in  the  exact  form  of  Rom.  12  :  ip  which  is  not 
that  of  the  Septuagint.  All  the  other  quotations  of  Hebrews  are  very  exact  tran- 
scriptions of  the  Septuagint, 

8 


INTRODUCTION 


tions  of  the  radical  school  of  Baur  at  Tubingen  left  the 
authenticity  of  Galatians,  Romans,  and  the  two  Epistles  to 
the  Corinthians  unchallenged.  In  fact,  the  sense  of  tre- 
mendous earnestness  and  reality  suffused  from  its  pages 
makes  it  difficult  to  do  real  justice  to  the  minute  and  learned 
criticism  of  a  few  scholars  who  reject  the  Pauline  author- 
ship. To  the  great  majority  of  scholars  this  criticism  repre- 
sents only  a  galvanizing  into  ephemeral  activity  of  the  long 
defunct  opposition  of  Bruno  Bauer;  but  since  it  is  ad- 
vanced by  some  serious  investigators  it  is  not  right  to  dis- 
miss it  unheard. 

Necessarily  this  criticism  is  accompanied  by  a  correspond- 
ing treatment  as  later  and  unauthentic  of  all  the  writings 
of  the  sub-apostolic  age  already  enumerated  (i.e.,  Clement 
of  Rome,  Ignatius,  Polycarp)  as  employing  the  great 
Pauline  Epistles,  leaving  nothing  to  the  "Apostolic  age'* 
as  a  really  contemporary  document  save  the  Diary  incor- 
porated by  the  author  of  Acts  as  one  of  his  sources  in  por- 
tions of  Acts  i6  :  10-28  :  16. 

But  even  the  ultra-critics  will  not  deny  to  that  same  sub- 
apostolic  age  to  which  Galatians  is  attributed  a  reverence 
for  the  memory  of  the  apostles,  and  especially  of  Peter, 
which  verges  on  idolatry.  In  the  book  of  Acts  itself,  which 
the  hypercritics  regard  as  representing  the  currently  ac- 
cepted views  of  the  Church  regarding  the  apostles  in  the 
period  of  their  pseudo-Paul,  both  Peter  (Acts  10  :  25-26) 
and  Paul  (Acts  14  :  11-15,  28  :  6)  must  deprecate  divine 
honors.  But  little  later  a  Clement  of  Rome  (Cor.  v  and 
xlvii)  and  an  Ignatius  {Magnesians,  vii.  i,  xiii.  i ;  Romans^ 
iv.  3)  regard  the  utterance  of  an  Apostle  as  for  all  practical 
purposes  equivalent  to  the  voice  of  God !  With  all  possible 
concessions  to  the  ingenuity  and  learning  of  the  Dutch 
school,  surely  common  sense  must  revolt  at  the  idea  that 
this  age  both  produced  and  adopted  into  unquestioning 
circulation  a  spurious  writing  which  represented  Paul  as 
rebuking  Peter  publicly  to  his  face,  and  as  imputing  to 
him  both  cowardice  and  "hypocrisy"!     We  have,  indeed. 


INTRODUCTION 


instances  in  plenty  of  the  acceptance  by  the  Church  of 
pseudonymous  documents.  Those  attributed  to  Peter  are 
instances,  with  one  possible  exception.  But  we  have  yet 
to  hear  of  a  pseudonymous  writing  in  antagonism  to  the 
accepted  and  cherished  beliefs  of  the  Church  obtaining 
even  temporary  currency  without  the  hue  and  cry  of  vehe- 
ment denunciation. 

We  are  told  that  the  Pauline  Epistles  were  the  products 
of  a  local  faction  of  the  Church.  Galatians  represents  the 
beginning  {ca.  130  a.d.)  of  that  anti- Jewish  ultra-Paulinism 
which  in  less  than  a  score  of  years  produced  the  tremendous 
schism  of  Marcion,  almost  dividing  the  Church  in  half. 

We  are  willing  to  believe  that  with  Paul  as  with  some 
other  men  the  suaviter  in  modo  yielded  when  he  laid  hold 
of  the  pen  to  the  fortiter  in  re,  so  that  it  was  only  the  later 
age,  an  age  which  came  to  know  him  through  his  writings 
rather  than  his  personality,  which  appreciated  at  its  full 
width  the  chasm  which  separates  him  from  the  Galilean 
apostles.  A  certain  rekindling  of  the  old  flame  of  contro- 
versy of  the  days  of  the  first  Gentile  missions  might  thus 
come  from  the  glowing  embers  of  Paul's  "  literary  remains," 
when  these  came  to  be  more  widely  known.  It  might 
produce  —  it  did  produce  in  140-160  a.d.  —  on  the  one  side 
a  Marcion  to  out-Paul  Paul,  on  the  other  a  church  father 
as  timid  in  the  use  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  as  Justin  Martyr, 
Marcion's  contemporary  and  antagonist.^  But  there  are 
some  things  that  a  later  than  the  great  missionary  age  of 
the  outpouring  of  the  Spirit  could  not  produce.  One  of 
these  is  a  second  great  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  to  be  the 
Pseudo-Paul  of  the  letters.  A  second  is  a  repetition  of  the 
historical  conditions  under  which  the  propaganda  of  cir- 

»  Our  only  writings  from  Justin  are  directed  to  the  defence  of  Christianity  against 
outsiders.  In  his  Apologies,  addressed  to  the  Emperor,  he  of  course  referred  to  "  the 
memoirs  of  the  (Galilean)  Apostles"  rather  than  to  the  doctrinal  writings  of  Paul 
as  authority.  In  his  Dialogue  against  Trypho  the  Jew  he  would  have  even  less 
occasion  to  appeal  to  Paul.  His  argument  passes  from  the  predictions  of  the  prophets 
to  the  fulfilment  of  them  in  the  life  of  Jesus,  as  described  in  the  "memoirs."  Had 
we  Justin's  treatise  against  Marcion  we  should  doubtless  learn  what  he  thought  of 
Paul,  on  whose  doctrines  Marcion  so  largely  depends. 


INTRODUCTION 


cumcision(!)  and  "the  yoke  of  the  law"  could  become  a 
real  peril  to  Gentile-Christian  churches.  A  third  is  an 
orthodoxy  so  pusillanimous  as  to  receive  without  protest  at 
the  hands  of  a  Marcion,  as  authentic  letters  of  Paul,  a  set 
of  spurious  documents  expressly  framed  to  contradict  the 
older,  better  grounded,  more  widely  prevalent  representa- 
tion of  its  own  book  of  Acts,  whose  author  himself,  on  this 
theory,  would  have  been  a  contemporary  of  the  forger ! 

IV.  Relation  to  the  Story  of  Paul  in  Acts 

Since  the  opponents  of  the  authenticity  of  the  greater 
Pauline  Epistles  have  taken  their  stand  upon  the  narrative 
of  Acts,  and  regard  Galatians  as  belonging  to  a  period 
even  later  than  that  narrative  in  its  present  form,  we  may 
appropriately  consider  at  this  point  a  question  which  in 
any  event  would  be  vital,  and  is  particularly  unavoidable 
in  the  case  of  this  Epistle,  viz.  What  is  the  respective  view- 
point of  Galatians  and  Acts  ?  What  is  the  real  measure  of 
difference  between  the  two  writers,  and  the  relative  degree 
of  credence  assignable  to  the  course  of  events  as  related  by 
the  one  and  inferred  from  the  other? 

As  much  as  possible  the  work  of  the  individual  commen- 
tator must  be  prevented  from  overlapping  that  of  his  fellow- 
worker  in  adjacent  fields;  but  in  the  case  of  Galatians 
and  Acts  some  overlapping  is  unavoidable.  Both  are  con- 
cerned in  a  considerable  part  of  their  contents  with  the 
same  vitally  important  events,  and  both,  to  a  greater  degree 
than  is  commonly  realized,  treat  of  those  events  in  an  in- 
terest which  is  fundamentally  the  same,  viz.  the  vindication 
of  Paul's  apostleship  and  gospel;  though,  as  we  shall  see, 
these  are  really  conceived  in  widely  different  senses. 

Moreover,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  while  the  book 
of  Acts  as  a  whole  is  almost  forty  years  later  in  date  ^  than 
the  great  Epistles,  and  unmistakably  reflects  that  strongly 
idealizing  tendency  of  the  post-apostolic  age  to  which  we 

'  Gilbert,  Acts  {Bible  Jor  Home  and  School,  p.  31),  70-90  a.d. 
II 


INTRODUCTION 


have  already  referred,  its  compiler  has  employed  through- 
out the  portion  dealing  with  Paul's  later  career  a  source, 
limited  indeed  in  extent  but  of  almost  incomparable  value, 
the  so-called  "Diary"  of  Paul's  companion  in  travel  of  Acts 
i6  :  10-18;  20  :  5-15;  21  :  1-18;  and  27  :  1-28  :  16. 
Whether  it  be  Luke  himself,  that  one  among  the  known 
companions  of  Paul  most  plausibly  to  be  identified  with 
this  unknown  diarist;  or  be  it  some  later  historian  who 
has  combined  the  Diary  with  other  sources  relating  to  the 
origins  of  the  greater  churches,  and  has  given  to  the  com- 
pilation its  present  development  and  rhetorical  finish  ;  at 
all  events  the  author  is  mainly  concerned  with  the  same 
great  conflict  of  the  apostoHc  age  which  engages  the  pen 
of  Paul,  the  conflict  through  which  Christianity  threw  off 
the  swathing  bands  of  Judaism,  and  became  conscious  of 
itself  as  a  world  religion.  Not  alone  the  central  portion  of 
the  book  (cc.  13-15)  is  occupied  with  the  raising  and  settle- 
ment of  the  great  question  to  what  extent,  if  at  all,  the 
"yoke  of  the  law"  should  be  considered  binding  on  Gentile 
converts;  the  earlier  portion  as  well,  which  has  Peter  as 
its  leading  character,  also  culminates  in  a  settlement  of 
this  question  (in  principle),  by  apostolic  conclave  in  Jeru- 
salem (Acts  10  :  i-ii  :  18).  The  later  portion,  having 
Paul  as  its  chief  actor,  and  as  its  subject  the  peaceful  and 
triumphant  progress  of  Gentile  missions,  starts  from  the 
account  of  its  settlement  (in  practice)  by  the  second  apos- 
tolic conclave  in  Jerusalem  (c.  15).  It  centers  upon  the 
story  of  still  a  third  conclave  (21  :  17-26),  whereat  Paul 
meets  in  Jerusalem  the  leaders  of  Jewish  Christian  conser- 
vatism under  the  leadership  of  James,  and  establishes  to 
their  entire  satisfaction  the  falsity  of  the  charge  that  he 
had  taught  "the  Jews  which  are  among  the  Gentiles"  to 
disregard  the  Mosaic  law.^  The  book  concludes  with  the 
establishment  of  free  and  untrammelled  Gentile  Christianity 
(as  Luke  understands  the  terms)  at  Rome. 

»  The  present  writer's  views  of  the  theological  standpoint  of  the  author  of  Luke- 
Acts,  which  is  a  much  more  conservative  standpoint  than  that  of  Mark,  or  of  the 
source  embodied  in  Acts  lo  :  i-ii  :  18,  differ  to  some  extent  from  those  of  Professor 


INTRODUCTION 


Perhaps  it  is  too  much  to  expect  that  even  a  personal 
adherent  and  ardent  devotee  of  Paul  should  have  so  clear 
a  conception  of  Paul's  own  attitude  regarding  his  apostle- 
ship  and  gospel  as  not  to  yield  more  or  less,  when  writing 
the  story  of  Christianity's  triumph  over  Judaism  some 
twenty-five  years  after  Paul's  death,  to  the  spell  of  later 
veneration  for  the  personal  followers  of  Jesus.  In  any  case 
the  evidences  of  "idealization"  are  admittedly  abundant  in 
the  Lukan  story.  Its  author  is  convinced  that  the  solution 
accepted  in  his  own  time  and  environment  had  been  from 
the  outset  revealed  to  the  twelve  Apostles  commissioned  by 
the  Lord  to  the  work  of  evangelizing  the  world  (Lk.  24  :  47- 
49;  Acts  1:8;  II  :  1-18;  17:  22-29).  This  leaves,  of 
course,  no  room  for  any  serious  disagreement  between  Paul 
and  Peter,  James,  or  any  other  of  the  apostolic  circle.  All 
the  painful  and  momentous  breach  with  Peter  at  Antioch 
so  vividly  described  by  Paul  (Gal.  2  :  11-21),  all  the  years 
of  storm  and  stress  (the  very  years  of  Luke's  companion- 
ship), during  which  Paul  was  battling  almost  single-handed 
for  the  gospel  of  freedom  from  the  law  for  Jew  and  Gentile 
alike,  wrestling  in  the  agonies  of  a  second  childbirth  (Gal. 
4  :  19)  against  the  reenslavement  of  his  Gentile  converts 
under  the  Jewish  Christian's  "yoke  of  bondage,"  Luke 
makes  to  disappear.  There  are  no  serious  opponents  save 
the  wicked  Jews.  On  the  contrary,  when  the  work  of  the 
church  in  Antioch,  carried  on  in  Gentile  territory  through 
its  missionaries  ("apostles,"  Acts  14  :  4,  14)  "Barnabas 
and  Paul,"  at  first  encounters  opposition  at  the  hands  of  cer- 
tain unauthorized  "troublers"  (Acts  15  :  i,  24),  the  opposi- 
tion is  immediately  quelled  when  brought  to  the  attention 
of  the  Twelve  by  their  authoritative  declaration  of  God's 
special  revelation  to  Peter  of  his  approval  of  similar  work 
(Acts  15  :  7).  Paul  on  his  part,  as  we  have  seen,  readily 
silences  the  subsequent  complaint  that  he  has  taught  the 

Gilbert  in  the  companion  volume  of  this  series.  They  are  made  sufficiently  clear 
in  two  articles  recently  published  in  The  American  Journal  of  Theology  entitled  re- 
spectively "Acts  ver.m!^  Galatians,  the  Crux  of  Apostolic  History"  (July,  1907),  and 
"Hamack  and  the  Lukan  Narrative"  (January,  iqoq). 


INTRODUCTION 


(unevangelized)  Jews  which  are  among  the  Gentiles  to  for- 
sake Moses.  He  does  so  by  a  public  act  undertaken  at 
Jerusalem  for  the  express  purpose  of  proving  that  in  his 
methods  he  has  followed  loyally  and  consistently  the  rules 
prescribed  by  "the  apostles  and  elders  at  Jerusalem." 
"All  shall  know,"  says  James,  "that  there  is  no  truth  in 
the  things  whereof  they  (the  believing  Jews  zealous  for  the 
law)  have  been  informed  concerning  thee,  but  that  thou 
thyself  walkest  orderly,  keeping  the  law."  And  Paul  ac- 
quiesces and  undertakes  the  proof !  ^  The  implications  of 
Luke  here  and  elsewhere  are  clear  and  unmistakeable,  and 
reveal  to  us  how  he  understood  Paul's  gospel  of  "justifica- 
tion apart  from  works  of  the  law."  It  applied  to  Gentiles, 
but  not  to  Jews!  The  latter,  including  even  "Jews  which 
are  among  the  Gentiles,"  must  continue  to  circumcise  their 
children,^  and  to  "walk  after  the  customs."  So  far  from 
Peter,  or  even  Paul  himself,  being  under  obligation  to  forego 
their  Jewish  scruples  and  "eat  with  the  Gentiles"  when 
among  "those  that  are  without  the  law"  (Gal.  2  :  11-21; 
I  Cor.  9  :  20-22),  it  is  the  Gentiles  who  are  under  obliga- 
tion to  make  such  concessions  as  are  "necessary"  to  meet 
the  scruples  of  their  Jewish  fellow-believers;  because  "in 
every  city"  they  hear  Moses  "read  in  the  synagogues  every 
Sabbath"  (Acts  15  :  21-29).^  Nay,  Luke  goes  even  be- 
yond this.  He  thinks  that  Paul  himself  personally  set 
the  example  to  all  "Jews  which  are  among  the  Gentiles" 
of  "walking  orderly,  keeping  the  law."  So  far  from 
insisting  that  Peter  and  Barnabas  and  "the  rest  of  the 
Jews"  when  among  Gentiles  should  renounce  their 
Mosaic  scruples,  he  himself  took  formal  part  in  the  nazi- 
rite  ceremonial  in  the  temple  on  a  great  and  critical 
occasion  on  purpose  to  prove  that  all  reports  to  the  con- 
trary notwithstanding  he,  Paul,  even  when  among  Gentiles ^ 

»  Acts  21  :  24-26. 

»  The  case  of  Timothy  in  Galatia  is  related  as  a  precedent  on  this  very  point. 
Acts  16  :  1-3.  Paul's  refusal  to  circumcise  Titus,  intended  as  a  precedent  on  the  other 
side  (Gal.  2  :  1-3),  is  passed  over  in  silence. 

3  On  the  intention  of  the  Jerusalem  "decrees"  see  below  p.  66  and  Appended 
Note  B. 

14 


INTRODUCTION 


set  the  example  to  the  Jews  of  "walking  orderly,  keeping 
thelaw!"! 

So  with  the  other  matter  so  vital  to  Paul,  the  independence 
of  his  apostleship,  and  its  parity  as  "an  apostleship  to  the 
Gentiles"  with  Peter's  as  "an  apostleship  to  the  circum- 
cision." 2  Luke  is  committed  to  the  view  that  the  evangeli- 
zation of  the  Gentiles  was  the  original  commission  of  Jesus 
to  the  Twelve.^  More  particularly  the  definite  direction  to 
begin  the  work  was  given,  he  declares,  by  special  divine 
revelation  to  Peter  when  the  time  was  fully  ripe ;  ^  so  that 
Peter  can  subsequently  declare  in  the  very  presence  of 
Paul,  before  the  assembled  church,  "Brethren,  ye  know 
how  that  a  good  while  ago  God  made  choice  among  you 
that  by  my  mouth  the  Gentiles  should  hear  the  word  of  the 
gospel  and  believe."  ^  Peter  being  thus  the  real  Apostle  to 
the  Gentiles,  there  is  no  room  for  Paul  save  as  a  practical 
agent,  "a  chosen  vessel  to  bear"  the  message  "before  the 
Gentiles  and  kings  and  the  children  of  Israel."  Moreover, 
this  practical  activity  of  Paul  Luke  cannot  permit  to  antici- 
pate the  precedent  established  by  Peter.  It  must  be  deferred 
until  as  missionary  agent  ("apostle")  of  the  church  in  An- 
tioch,  along  with,  and  at  first  in  subordination  to  Barnabas, 
Paul  accomplishes  "  the  work  whereunto  "  God  had  "  called 
him."  "  Such  an  independent  missionary  activity  as  Paul 
himself  describes,  making  its  very  beginning  among  the 
Gentiles,'  creating  its  own  precedents,  is  simply  inadmissible 
on  Luke's  theory.  Luke  is  compelled,  from  his  general  as- 
sumption, to  think  of  Paul's  earlier  Christian  career  as  spent 
among  Jewish  believers  in  subordination  to  and  in  depend- 
ence on  the  apostles  and  Barnabas.*    He  describes  it  as 

'  Acts  21  :  20-26.     Cf.  Gal.  2  :  11-21.  »  Gal.  2  :  8. 

3  Lk.  24  :  49;  Acts  I  :  8. 

*  Acts  9  :  32-n  :  18.    In  the  source  this  section  probably  came  after  c.  12. 

5  Acts  15  :  7-  ^  Acts  13  :  1-3;    cf.  9  :  15,  26-30.  ^  Gal.  i  :  10-24. 

'  Acts  9  :  22-30;  II  :  19-26.  In  the  latter  passage  (ver.  20)  an  original  "  Greeks" 
has  been  altered  by  Luke  to  "Grecian  Jews"  (on  the  question  of  text  see  Warfield, 
Joiirn.  of  Bibl.  Lit.  Ill,  p.  113-137).  This  change,  so  clearly  against  the  context, 
is  to  avoid  the  (manifestly  historical)  representation  that  Antioch  itself  was  a  half 
Gentile  foundation  and  that  the  "  trouble  of  15  :  24  alluded  to  by  Paul  (Gal.  3  : 4) 
was  really  at  this  time. 

IS 


INTRODUCTION 


occupied  with  fruitless  endeavors  to  convert  the  Greek- 
speaking  Jews,  first  at  Damascus,  afterwards  at  Jerusalem, 
"and  in  all  the  country  of  Judaea"  (Acts  9  :  22,  28-30; 
22  :  17-21;  26  :  20).  When  he  is  "sent  away  to  Tarsus" 
to  escape  Jewish  hostility,  not  a  word  is  said  about  his 
preaching  there.  Only  after  a  second  intervention  of 
Barnabas,  and  by  special  revelation  of  the  Spirit,  does  Paul 
find  at  last  his  life-work.  This  is  that  he  should  be  the  great 
foreign  missionary  of  the  church  of  Antioch  (Acts  11  :  19- 
26;  13  :  1-3) ;  but  even  then  at  the  start  as  subordinate  to 
Barnabas.  The  visit  to  Jerusalem  with  Barnabas  has  no 
relation  to  Paul's  missionary  activity.  It  is  not  made  that 
he  and  Barnabas  may  secure  freedom  to  work  in  their  own 
province  unmolested.  It  is  not  made  that  Paul  "may  not 
labor  in  vain  neither  run  in  vain."  Even  if  the  partners 
take  back  to  Antioch  with  them  from  Jerusalem  the  nephew 
of  Barnabas,  who  became  their  minister  on  the  great  cam- 
paign of  Gentile  evangelization,  this  was  mere  coincidence. 
The  idea  of  the  Gentile  mission  was  a  divine  revelation, 
but  it  came  later. 

The  question  whether  so  fundamental  a  difference  in 
view-point  on  such  vital  questions  as  those  of  Paul's  apostle- 
ship  and  gospel  is  compatible  with  the  theory  of  Lukan 
authorship  of  Acts  is  one  which  can  only  be  settled  by  a 
criticism  which  is  beyond  our  present  province.  But  on 
any  theory  the  difference  in  view-point  remains,  and  can- 
not be  ignored  in  any  attempt,  such  as  we  have  now  to 
make,  to  reconstruct  the  historical  background  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians.  Disagreement  with  Acts,  as  we 
have  seen,  cannot  mihtate  against  the  authenticity  of  the 
great  Pauline  Epistles.  It  may  compel  us  to  exercise  con- 
siderable caution  in  adopting  the  statements  of  Acts  specially 
affected  by  this  view-point.  In  short  we  are  obliged  to  use 
with  utmost  respect  the  data  afforded  by  this  our  one  his- 
torical source;  yet  we  must  insist  upon  discrimination  be- 
tween the  more  trustworthy  and  the  less,  and  are  now  aware 
of  certain  general  preconceptions  which  decidedly  affect 

16 


INTRODUCTION 


Luke's  representation,  particularly  as  regards  Paul's  earlier 
career,  and  his  relations  to  the  Twelve.^ 

V.  To  WHOM  Galatians  was  Written 

From  the  very  subject  of  Acts,  which  aims  to  vindicate 
Paul's  evangelization  of  the  Gentile  world  by  setting  his 
"career  in  parallelism  with  that  of  Peter,  though  on  a  lower 
plane,  we  should  anticipate  in  its  pages  a  specially  full 
account  of  the  founding  and  development  of  "  the  churches 
of  Galatia,"  which  from  Paul's  letter  appear  to  have  afforded 
the  chief  battle-ground  in  the  attempt  to  subject  Gentile 
believers  to  "the  yoke  of  the  law."  And  in  point  of  fact 
in  Acts  the  story  of  the  four  great  churches  of  (Pisidian) 
Antioch,  Iconium,  Derbe,  and  Lystra  is  related  with  very 
exceptional  fulness.  We  have  first  two  long  chapters  (cc. 
13-14)  descriptive  of  the  First  Missionary  Journey  and  its 
results,  wherein  their  founding  is  the  main  matter.  This 
leads  over  to  the  story  (c.  15)  how  delegates  of  the  church 
in  Antioch,  on  whose  initiative  the  missionary  campaign 
had  been  undertaken,  went  up  to  Jerusalem  and  obtained 
from  a  solemn  conclave  of  "the  apostles  and  elders"  a  sort 
of  magna  charta,  endorsing  the  work,  and  limiting  to  four 
"necessary  things"  the  obligations  which  might  be  imposed 
upon  Gentile  converts  from  the  side  of  Judaism,  Thirdly 
and  finally  the  succeeding  section  (Acts  15  :  30-16  :  6)  re- 
lates how  the  two  great  Gentile  districts  thus  evangelized 
by  Barnabas  and  Paul,  Cyprus,  and  trans-Cilician  Asia 
Minor,  were  revisited  and  estabHshed  on  the  basis  of  the 
settlement  effected  in  Jerusalem.  Barnabas  with  Mark  now 
returned  to  Cyprus,  his  native  province,  while  Paul  with 
Silas  returned  to  Derbe  and  Lystra  and  the  other  trans- 
Taurus  cities.  Luke  adds:  "And  as  they  went  on  their 
way  through  the  cities,  they  delivered  them  the  decrees  for 
to  keep,  which  had  been  ordained  of  the  apostles  and  elders 

»  On  Luke's  transfer  of  the  Conference  of  Barnabas  and  Paul  with  the  Pillars  at 
Jerusalem  from  just  before  (Acts  ii  :  10-30;  12  :  25)  to  just  after  the  First  Mis- 
sionary Journey  (Acts  11:1-35)  see  above,  p.  15,  note  8,  and  Appended  Note  B. 

c  17 


INTRODUCTION 


that  were  at  Jerusalem."  Thus  he  concludes  his  account 
of  how  the  systematic  evangelization  of  the  Gentile  world 
was  begun,  and  how  it  was  endorsed  and  regulated  by  "  the 
apostles  and  elders  in  Jerusalem.' 

I.  The  Churches  of  Galatia.  —  From  Acts  i6  :  6  Luke 
begins  the  account  of  the  so-called  Second  Missionary 
Journey,  an  (independent)  missionary  enterprise  of  Paul 
and  Silas,  which  resulted  in  the  evangelization  of  both  coasts 
of  the  yEgean  (Acts  i6  :  6-18  :  23).  The  story  of  the  con- 
quest of  this  new  territory  begins  with  a  temporarily  frus- 
trated attempt  to  enter  the  province  of  (proconsular)  Asia. 
The  missionaries  "passed  through  the  region  of  Galatian 
Phrygia"  in  an  attempt  to  enter  Bithynia,  "because  they 
had  been  forbidden  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  speak  the  word 
in  Asia."  This  is  the  only  occurrence  of  the  term  "  Gala- 
tia" in  Acts,  with  one  exception.  A  similar  phrase  in  in- 
verted order  is  found  in  18  :  23:  "And  having  spent  some 
time  (in  Syrian  Antioch)  he  departed,  and  went  through 
the  region  of  Galatia  and  (through)  Phrygia  in  order, 
stablishing  all  the  disciples."  It  is  practically  certain  that 
in  Acts  18  :  23  the  writer  means  to  include  the  four  great 
churches  of  the  First  Missionary  Journey  under  the  term 
"region  of  Galatia";  for  he  is  describing  a  systematic  visi- 
tation ("in  order")  for  the  "stablishment"  of  "all  the 
disciples"  between  (Syrian)  Antioch  and  Ephesus;  and 
Derbe,  Lystra,  Iconium,  and  (Pisidian)  Antioch  lay  di- 
rectly upon  the  great  high  road  between  Syria  and  Ephesus. 
As  these  four  cities  at  the  time  of  Luke's  writing  had  formed 
part  of  the  Roman  province  of  Galatia  for  more  than  a 
hundred  years,  and  seventy-five  or  more  at  the  time  of 
Paul's  visit,  it  would  be  most  natural  for  Luke  thus  to  group 
them  in  this  general  summary,  although  in  the  more  de- 
tailed account  of  their  founding  (cc.  13,  14)  he  designates 
them  in  accordance  with  their  ethnic  character  as  "cities 
of  Lycaonia"  and  "Pisidia,"  notwithstanding  these  former 
territorial  divisions  no  longer  had  existence  on  the  Roman 
map.    If  so,  the  region  designated  " Phrygo-Galatic  region" 

i8 


INTRODUCTION 


or  "region  of  Galatian  Phrygia"  in  i6  :  6  is  referred  to  in 
the  subsequent  more  summary  account  of  i8  :  23  not  as 
"Galatia,"  but  simply  "Phrygia." 

It  thus  appears  that  the  only  portion  of  the  province  of 
Galatia  ever  entered  by  Paul  according  to  Acts  is  ''South 
Galatia,"  for  the  phrase  ''Phrygo-Galatic  "  in  Acts  16:6 
expressly  distinguishes  this  ''region  "  from  Galatia  strictly 
so  called.^  But  in  the  third  century  "South  Galatia"  in 
the  process  of  Roman  redefinition  of  provincial  frontiers  was 
again  excluded  from  "Galatia,"  and,  whether  at  the  same 
period  or  later,  Acts  16 :  6  was  altered  to  read  "passed  through 
the  regions  of  Galatia  and  Phrygia."  It  was  quite  inevitable 
that  the  church  fathers  should  assume  after  this  that  "the 
churches  of  Galatia"  were  founded  on  this  (supposed) 
journey  to  "Galatia,"  and  the  majority  of  modern  commen- 
tators, though  rejecting  the  reading,  still  hold  to  this  view. 

What,  then,  is  Luke's  meaning  in  Acts  16  :  6-10?  It  is 
clear  from  the  formal  wind-up  of  his  whole  account  of  the 
"trouble"  about  the  churches  founded  on  the  First  Mis- 
sionary Journey  in  Acts  i6  :  5,  that  "South  Galatia  "  is  now 
left  behind.  After  the  settlement,  wherein  the  essential 
features  are  the  circumcision  of  Timothy  in  Lystra,  and  the 
distribution  of  the  "decrees,"  Luke  advances  w'th  ver.  6 
to  the  new  campaign  on  unevangelized  territory.  "Asia," 
that  is  Ephesus  and  its  adjacent  district,  had  been  the  strate- 
gic objective ;  but  for  some  reason,  perhaps  the  same  which 
later  made  Paul  hesitate  to  remain  there  although  urgently 
entreated  (Acts  18  :  20),  a  reason  which  may  readily  be 
guessed  from  Rom.  15  :  20-22  (cf.  Acts  19  :  i),  the  mission- 
aries at  their  last  station  of  Christianized  territory  (Pisidian 
Antioch?)  were  turned  from  their  course  by  a  "revelation  " 
conveyed  through  the  (local?)  prophets.  For  this  reason 
they  turned  due  north  and  "passed  through  the  region  of 
Galatian  Phrygia."     This  region,  now  "traversed  "  by  Paul 

'  "  The  term  Galatic  excludes  Galatia  in  the  narrow  sense;  and  Acts  i6  :  6  when 
taken  according  to  contemporary  usage  asserts  that  Paul  did  not  traverse  North 
Galatia." — Ramsay,  Church  in  the  Roman  Empire,  p.  8i. 

19 


INTRODUCTION 


with  Silas  and  Timothy  between  Pisidian  Antioch  and  an 
unnamed  point  ''over  against  Mysia"  in  their  attempt  to 
"go  into  Bithynia,"  lay  therefore  on  the  very  border  between 
*'Asia"  and  Galatia,  and  had  in  older  times  formed  part  of 
"Phrygia." 

The  missionaries  "passed  through"  Phrygia  Galatica  as 
Peter  was  entreated  to  "pass  through"  without  delay  to 
the  help  of  the  disciples  in  Joppa.^  Either  Luke,  whether 
through  ignorance  or  design,  had  nothing  to  tell  about  the 
founding  of  "the  churches  of  Galatia"  and  their  relation 
to  the  historic  controversy  wherein  Paul's  championship 
of  their  cause  secured  the  truth  of  the  gospel  to  the  whole 
Gentile  world  (Gal.  2:5);  or  else  he  understands  by  them 
the  ethnically  diverse  churches  of  Southern  Galatia  whose 
evangehzation  and  subsequent  "  stablishment "  he  relates 
with  such  exceptional  fulness  and  interest  in  13  :  13-14  :  28; 
15 :  30-16 : 5  and  18 :  23.  Only  in  connection  with  these  cities 
of  Pisidia,  Phrygia,  and  Lycaonia  have  we  any  clear  intimation 
from  Acts  that  Paul  ever  entered  the  province  of  Galatia. 

2.  The  North  Galatian  Theory.  —  But  many  recent  au- 
thorities still  think  it  impossible  to  reHnquish  the  North 
Galatian  theory.  The  great  commentator  Lightfoot  found 
evidence  of  Celtic  blood  (!)  in  the  "fickleness"  displayed 
by  Paul's  converts  in  so  soon  forsaking  his  gospel  (Gal. 
1:6).  But  had  the  Galatians  displayed  all  the  volatiUty 
which  the  typical  EngHshman  imagines  to  be  characteristic 
of  the  typical  Frenchman,  they  could  hardly  have  surpassed 
in  fickleness  the  Lycaonians  of  Lystra,  who  were  first  for 
worshipping  Paul,  and  in  a  twinkhng,  under  the  influence  of 
"Jews  from  Antioch  and  Iconium,"  attempted  to  stone  him 
to  death  (Acts  13:  8-19). 

Other  arguments  for  the  North  Galatian  theory  have  more 
weight  to-day,  especially  with  German  scholars.  For  while 
it  is  difficult  to  suppose  that  an  author  with  the  aims  and 
interests  of  Luke  would  have  been  silent  as  to  the  founding 
of  "the  churches  of  Galatia  "  so  prominent  in  the  Epistles, 

»  Acts  9  :  38  (Greek). 
20 


INTRODUCTION 


there  is  an  undeniable  advantage  in  debate  to  the  contestant 
who  can  take  refuge  in  our  ignorance.  As  we  know  nothing 
whatever  about  the  evangehzation  of  North  Galatia,  which 
does  not  so  much  as  come  within  the  purview  of  ecclesiastical 
writers  until  about  170  a.d.,  it  is  impossible  to  say  that  any 
of  the  occurrences  implied  in  Paul's  allusions  to  his  ''former  " 
and  latter  visits  among  the  "  Galatians  "  could  not  have  taken 
place  there.  The  most  recent  and  one  of  the  most  eminent 
of  German  commentators  even  finds  it  "fatal  "  to  the  South 
Galatian  theory  that  whereas  according  to  Gal.  4  :  13  ff. 
Paul  was  detained  among  the  Galatians  by  illness,  and  so 
engaged  in  their  evangelization,  we  have  in  Acts  13-14  no 
intimation  of  any  illness  of  Paul,  while  in  Acts  16  :  6  f.  we 
are  told  that  Paul  was  "forbidden  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to 
speak  the  word  in  Asia."  ^  We  will  not  adopt  the  sarcasm 
of  R.  Steck,  who  inquires  whether  then  we  are  to  identify 
"the  Holy  Ghost"  with  Paul's  "messenger  of  Satan  sent 
to  buffet  him  " ;  ^  but  we  may  at  least  point  out  that  illness  is 
certainly  not  the  cause  of  the  turning  aside  on  the  Second 
Missionary  Journey;  whereas  the  similar  turning  back  at 
almost  the  identical  spot  on  the  First  Missionary  Journey 
(Acts  13  151)  might  very  well  be  due  to  illness.  Acts  is 
simply  silent  as  to  the  reason  why  Paul  and  Barnabas  go 
first  to  the  extreme  western  limit  of  Galatian  territory,  and 
then,  when  driven  from  Pisidian  Antioch,  return  to  its 
nearer  cities,  instead  of  continuing  on  the  road  to  the  cities 
of  "Asia."  Illness  might  well  account  for  this  seeming 
halt  and  retreat.  The  case  of  the  flank  movement  of  Acts 
16  :  6  is  different.  Here  the  reason  is  distinctly  implied. 
The  intervention  of  "the  Holy  Spirit "  meets  the  crying  need 
of  "Macedonia"  (ver.  9-10).  If  one  interjects  a  campaign 
in  Galatia  this  motive  is  frustrated.  And  even  were  we  to 
suppose  an  illness,  of  which  there  is  not  the  slightest  inti- 
mation, no  treatment  could  possibly  be  so  improbable  as  the 
undertaking  of  a  new  and  arduous  missionary  campaign 

^  Bousset  in  J.  Weiss'  Schriften  des  neuen  Testaments,  1908,  II,  p.  29. 
» In  2  Cor.  12  :  5-10  Paul's  "weakness"  (Gr.  "illness")  is  so  described. 


INTRODUCTION 


across  the  half  barbarous  wilds  of  northern  Galatia,  among 
an  alien  race  speaking  an  unknown  tongue. 

Besides  this,  we  know  from  Paul's  letters  that  for  years 
before  his  final  visit  to  Jerusalem  he  had  been  engaged  in  a 
work  of  gathering  contributions  among  his  Gentile  converts 
*'for  the  poor  among  the  saints  that  are  at  Jerusalem " 
(Rom.  15  :  25-31).  The  ''churches  of  Galatia"  were  among 
the  first  to  engage  in  this  work  (i  Cor.  16  :  i)  which  seems  to 
have  been  undertaken  in  fulfilment  of  Paul's  pledge  to  the 
"Pillars"  in  Jerusalem,  shortly  before  the  rupture  with 
Peter  at  Antioch  (Gal.  2  :  10,  11  ff.).  In  the  great  gather- 
ing of  delegates  assembled  at  Troas  to  make  the  journey  with 
Paul  in  Acts  20  :  4,  in  which  as  a  rule  each  of  the  great  pro- 
vincial churches  of  Paul's  missionary  field  seems  to  have  been 
represented  by  two  ''messengers"  {cf.  2  Cor.  8-9),  it  is 
extremely  improbable  that  "the  churches  of  Galatia" 
should  have  been  unrepresented.  If  the  North  Galatian 
theory  be  true,  no  name  is  given  which  can  belong  to  their 
representatives.  Two  names,  however,  will  be  left  over 
with  no  group  of  churches  to  represent.  They  will  be  "Gains 
ofDerhe  "  and  "Timothy  of  Lystra:' 

If  "the  churches  of  Galatia"  be  not  found  in  the  com- 
paratively well-Hellenized  cities  of  Derbe  and  Lystra, 
Iconium  and  Pisidian  Antioch,  on  the  great  high  road  from 
Syria  to  "Asia,"  but  in  unknown  cities  of  the  remote  high- 
lands of  the  original  Galatia,  we  shall  encounter  another  per- 
plexity. In  Paul's  case  the  enthusiasm  of  the  cross  would 
doubtless  triumph,  even  in  the  face  of  physical  "weakness," 
against  all  deterrents  of  the  most  arduous  and  unpromising 
field  of  labor.  //  the  field  toward  which  in  the  intention  of 
Luke  in  Acts  16:  6-8  Paul  is  being  "driven  by  the  Spirit" 
is  really  the  virgin  soil  of  Galatia,  and  not  Macedonia  ripe 
for  the  harvest,  we  may  be  sure  that  Paul  would  have  gone, 
in  spite  of  all  we  know  of  his  "eye  for  strategic  points.'* 
But  what  of  the  Judaizers?  Thessalonica  and  PhiHppi 
seem  to  have  remained  too  remote  from  the  headquarters 
of  these  propagandists  to  be  reached  by  them.     Rome  itself 


INTRODUCTION 


was  not  seriously  affected.  But  the  North  Galatian  theory 
requires  us  to  assume  that  these  reactionaries,  who  could 
not  hope  for  success  save  where  a  considerable  Jewish 
element  formed  the  nucleus  of  the  church,  passed  by  the 
flourishing  PauHne  mission  field  of  Lycaonian  and  Pisidian 
Galatia,  leaving  unmolested  the  churches  formed  out  of  the 
''synagogues"  (Acts  13  :  14,  15;  14  :  i,  2)  of  Iconium  and 
Pisidian  Antioch,  neglecting  Derbe  and  Lystra  and  ''the 
Jews  that  were  in  those  parts"  (Acts  14  :  19;  16  :  3),  for 
the  uninviting  task  of  reconverting  to  Mosaism  ( ! )  Paul's 
barbarian  converts  in  Celtic  Galatia.  This  seems  hardly 
probable,  if  the  motives  of  the  Judaizers  were  such  as  Paul 
describes  (Gal.  6  :  12,  13). 

Other  objections  to  the  North  Galatian  theory  perhaps  as 
serious  as  those  already  instanced  spring  from  the  later  rela- 
tive dating  which  it  involves.  In  Gal.  4  :  13  Paul  implies 
that  he  had  been  twice  among  the  Galatians.^  Unless  Acts 
13-14  can  be  the  first  visit  and  Acts  15  :  30-16  :  5  the  second, 
this  compels  a  dating  of  the  letter  subsequent  to  the  estab- 
lishment of  Paul's  headquarters  in  Ephesus  (Acts  19  :  10). 
It  is  true  that  Paul  returned  to  Greece  shortly  before  writ- 
ing 2  Corinthians ;  but  so  late  as  this  the  appearance  of  the 
Judaizers  in  Galatia  could  hardly  be  the  surprise  to  Paul 
which  the  Epistle  implies,  nor  the  events  of  Gal.  2  unknown 
to  the  churches.  If  on  the  other  hand  we  date  Galatians 
during  the  period  of  his  residence  in  ''Asia,"  the  cry  of 
4  :  20,  "Would  that  I  could  be  present  with  you  now,"  be- 
comes difficult  to  explain.  One  asks,  "Well,  if  he  be  no 
firther  off  than  Ephesus,  still  more  if  he  be  in  Antioch 
(Acts  18  :  23)  on  the  point  of  a  journey  through  these  very 
regions,  why  in  the  world  does  he  not  go  ?  "  An  early  date 
with  remoteness  from  Galatia  can  only  be  found  in  the 
Second  Missionary  Journey  before  Paul's  departure  from 
Corinth  (Acts  18  :  18). 

^^  '  See  note  ad  loc.  Some  think  to  avoid  the  implication  by  rendering  to  proleron 
_  formerly,"  instead  of  "  the  former  time."  But  it  is  the  presence  of  the  distinguish- 
ing adverb,  however  rendered,  that  proves  the  point. 

23 


INTRODUCTION 


3.  The  Pauline  Geography.  —  If  against  the  attempts  to 
adjust  the  implications  of  Paul's  letter  to  the  story  of  Acts 
by  the  interjection  of  supposititious  journeys  to  North 
Galatia,  we  set  the  fact,  demonstrable  by  the  simple  use  of 
the  Greek  concordance,  that  Paul  and  Luke  differ  in  their 
use  of  geographical  terms,  the  difficulties  disappear,  and  it 
becomes  apparent  at  once  that  those  whom  Paul  addresses 
as  ''Galatians"  (Gal.  1:2;  3:1)  are  no  other  than  the 
churches  which  Luke  describes  as  founded  in  Antioch  of 
Pisidia,  Iconium  of  Phrygia,  and  Derbe  and  Lystra  of  Lyca- 
onia.  Paul,  who  invariably  employs  the  terminology  of 
the  official  Roman  geography,^  could  have  found  no  other 
common  term  to  address  them.  To  have  called  them 
''Phrygians"  would  have  been  insulting.^  Many  were 
Jews,  some  were  Romans.  All  would  take  most  satisfac- 
tion in  being  called  "Galatians." 

Even  Luke,  as  we  have  seen,  when  he  wishes  to  speak  of 
all  four  churches  as  a  group,  refers  to  them  as  ''the  disciples 
of  the  region  of  Galatia"  (Acts  18:  23).  Why  then  does 
he  not  so  describe  them  in  cc.  13-14?  In  speaking  of  the 
fortunes  of  "the  apostles  Barnabas  and  Saul,"  and  how  they 
were  affected  in  passing  from  one  to  another  of  these  cities, 
with  their  differing  speech,^  differing  customs  and  beliefs, 
different  government  or  proportion  of  Jewish  influence, 
Luke  gives  them  the  ethnic  name  indicative  of  these  differ- 
ences. In  like  manner  in  16  :  6  he  speaks  of  the  border 
region  between  official  "Asia"  and  "Galatia"  as  "the 
Phrygo-Galatic  region";  not  because  he  aims  at  accuracy 
as  a  historical  geographer,  and  knows  that  this  territory 
had  once  belonged  to  Phrygia,  though  now  incorporated  in 
"Galatia,"  but  because  he  knows  the  experiences  of  the 
travellers,  and  that  they  passed  through  a  region  where  the 

'  Paul  speaks,  like  the  Roman  citizen  that  he  was,  of  "Achaia"  (Rom.  15  :  26; 
I  Cor.  16  :  is;  etc.),  "Macedonia"  (i  Cor.  16  :  s;  2  Cor.  1  :  16;  etc.),  "Asia"  (i 
Cor.  16  :  19;  2  Cor.  i:  8;  etc.),  "  Illyria"  (Rom.  15  :  19),  or  "Dalmatia"  (2  Tim. 
4  :  10),  "Judaea"  (i.e.  Palestine,  Gal.  i  :  22;  i  Thess.  2  :  14;  etc.),  "Arabia"  (Gal. 
I  :  17;  4  :  25).  Even  had  he  not  been  a  Roman  born  it  would  be  more  natural  for 
the  campaign  leader  to  use  the  language  of  the  map. 

'  "Phrygian"  was  equivalent  to  "slave."  '  Acts  14  :  11. 

24 


INTRODUCTION 


people  whom  they  met  spoke  the  Phrygian  language  and 
wore  the  Phrygian  cap,  while  at  the  same  time  one  could  see 
not  infrequently  the  big-boned,  fair-haired  Gaul,  striding 
about  in  his  uncouth  garb  and  weapons,  and  talking  his 
outlandish  jargon.  Ethnically,  and  for  that  which  strikes  the 
traveller,  the  region  was ''Phrygo-Galatic"  (i6:6).  But  when 
Luke  has  occasion  later  to  mention  the  disciples  of  this  dis- 
trict as  a  whole,  they  are  simply  those  of  "  Phrygia  "  (i8  :  23). 
In  Lystra  they  used  ''the  speech  of  Lycaonia"  (14  :  11). 

Since  Pliny,  Tacitus,  and  Ptolemy  all  speak  of  the  hetero- 
geneous elements  combined  under  Galatian  sovereignty 
as  "Galatia,"  and  since  Iconium  itself  in  one  of  its  own 
inscriptions  of  the  first  century  a.d.  is  said  to  be  *'of  the  prov- 
ince of  Galatia,"  we  could  not  expect  Paul  to  refer  to  the 
churches  of  Acts  13-14  in  any  other  way  than  as  "churches 
of  Galatia."  Until  the  more  northerly  region  of  the  prov- 
ince was  evangelized,  which  so  far  as  we  know  did  not  take 
place  before  200  A.D.,  they  would  be  ^Uhe  churches  of 
Galatia."  Indeed  we  have  reason  to  think  they  long  con- 
tinued to  be  so  called.  The  second  century  romance  of 
Paid  and  Thekla  does  not  indeed  employ  the  collective  term, 
but  only  shows  that  the  individual  cities  were  still  remembered 
as  one  of  Paul's  great  mission  fields.  But  in  the  reign  of 
Domitian  (81-95  a.d.)  a  Paulinist,  writing  under  the  pseu- 
donym of  ''Peter,"  addresses  comprehensively  the  Chris- 
tians of  all  Asia  Minor.  As  he  has  no  other  term  under 
which  the  great  churches  of  the  First  Missionary  Journey 
can  be  included,  we  have  either  a  most  unaccountable 
omission,  or  else  this  author  too  includes  the  Pisidian  and 
Lycaonian  Christians  under  the  head  "  the  elect  of  the  dis- 
persion who  are  sojourners  in  .  .  .  Galatia .^^  ^ 

VI.  Date  and  Occasion  of  the  Letter 

If  we  may  now  regard  it  as  reasonably  established  that 
**the  churches  of  Galatia"  were  those  whose  foundation  is 

»  I  Pet.  I  :  I. 

25 


INTRODUCTION 


related  in  Acts  13-14,  we  may  properly  look  for  some  degree 
of  correspondence  between  the  allusions  of  the  letter  and 
the  story  as  related  by  Luke. 

We  have  seen  already  that  Gal.  4  :  13-20  implies  that 
Paul  had  been  among  them  on  two  previous  occasions, 
and  that  at  the  time  of  writing  some  insuperable  obstacle, 
so  self-evident  that  he  does  not  need  to  explain  its  nature, 
makes  his  coming  to  them  impracticable.  These  data, 
meagre  as  they  are,  suffice  to  establish  a  probable  situation 
for  the  Apostle  at  the  time  of  writing.  Paul  is  probably 
separated  from  them  by  the  broad  gulf  of  the  ^gean. 

I.  Relation  of  Galatians  to  Romans.  —  So  excellent 
a  critic  as  Adeney,^  who  accepts  this  geographical  infer- 
ence, argues,  however,  as  Lightfoot  did,  from  the  close  inter- 
relation of  Galatians  with  Romans  that  it  was  written,  like 
Romans,  from  Corinth,  and  but  shortly  before  Romans  itself. 

We  have  seen  ^  that  theories  which  regard  Antioch  or 
Ephesus  as  the  place  of  writing  are  improbable,  and  for 
the  most  part  are  mere  inferences  from  the  dates  adopted 
by  their  advocates.  But  the  relation  of  Galatians  to  Romans 
is  a  fact  not  so  lightly  to  be  dismissed  as  is  liable  to  be  the 
case  when  one  regards  it  as  a  mere  matter  of  style  and 
vocabulary.  It  is  something  much  more  far-reaching  than 
this,  which  could  be  easily  accounted  for  in  epistles  separated 
by  the  interval  even  of  half  a  decade  by  similarity  of  occasion 
and  subject-matter.  It  is  a  relation  much  slighter  in  degree, 
but  similar  to  that  which  subsists  between  Ephesians  and 
Colossians,  a  tendency  to  revert  to  the  same  arguments,  the 
same  data  and  illustrations,  to  prove  the  same  points,  in 
language  which  here  and  there  falls  into  even  identical 
phrases.^ 

Among  the  opponents  of  Pauline  authorship  this  relatioi 
is  considered  a  phenomenon  of  fundamental  importanceJ 
To  Steck  it  is  the  foundation  stone  of  his  argument  for  th( 

*  Century  Bible,  Thessalonians  and  Galatians,  by  W.  F.  Adeney,  1907  (?)  (1 
date),  pp.  87-97. 

'  Above,  p.  23.     See  also  Adeney.  op.  cit.,  pp.  05-97- 
3  For  parallel  phrases  see  Adeney,  ibid.,  p.  91  f. 
26 


J 


INTRODUCTION 


literary  dependence  of  Galatians  on  Romans  and  Acts. 
Galatians,  we  are  told,  would  be  unintelligible  to  readers 
unacquainted  with  the  fuller  form  of  the  Pauline  argument 
set  forth  in  Romans.  But  surely  this  is  precisely  what  the 
conditions  as  usually  understood  should  lead  us  to  expect. 
Galatians  was  written  to  converts  who  on  two  previous 
occasions  had  heard  the  exposition  of  Paul's  "gospel"; 
Romans,  to  converts  who  only  knew  of  it  by  hearsay.  Ga- 
latians was  written  in  the  violent  agitation  of  intense  polemic ; 
Romans,  as  a  calm  and  reasoned  exposition  of  Paul's  com- 
plete doctrine.  Why  should  not  Romans  complete  the 
gaps  and  fill  the  leaps  of  logic  in  the  shorter  epistle?  We 
are  not  surprised  to  find  great  differences  on  this  question 
of  priority  among  the  ultra-critics  themselves,  while  not  only 
conservatives  such  as  Lightfoot  and  Adeney  take  the  fuller, 
more  closely  reasoned  form  of  the  argument  as  the  later; 
but  the  ultra-critics  themselves,  Steck  and  Van  Manen  in 
the  lead,  free-lances  like  Volter  and  Spitta  ardently  espous- 
ing the  cause,  are  eager  to  prove  to  us  that  Romans  itself 
is  a  composite,  of  which  portions  might  well  be  earlier  and 
portions  later  than  Galatians.^  In  short,  such  a  relation 
does  subsist  in  some  degree  as  between  Colossians  and 
Ephesians,  and  the  ultra-critics  are  simply  ringing  the 
changes  on  the  intricate  theory  of  a  much  greater  scholar,^ 
elaborated  to  fit  these  phenomena  in  the  case  of  Ephesians 
and  Colossians.  But  Ploltzmann's  theory  of  Ephesians  and 
Colossians  as  mutually  related  elaborations  of  a  Pauline 
substructure  remains  unconvincing  even  to  critics  of  his 
own  school  and  following.  Still  more  unconvincing  must 
be  the  far  weaker  case  of  Galatians  and  Romans.  The 
real  explanation  is  much  simpler.  The  same  writer  on 
similar  occasions  will  always  tend  to  repeat  himself.  If 
the  subject-matter  be  something  which  his  very  occupation 
compels  him  to  constantly  reiterate,  he  will  repeat  even 

»  See  the  article  s.v.  "Romans"  in  Encycl.  Bibl., by  Van  Manen,  with  the  earlier 
authorities  cited. 

»H.  J.  Holtzmann,  Kritik  der  Epheser  und  Colosserbriefc,  187a. 
27 


INTRODUCTION 


whole  phrases  in  identical,  or  very  closely  similar  language. 
So  with  Paul.  The  phenomenon  is  not  confined  to  Ephesians 
and  Colossians,  nor  to  Galatians  and  Romans.  The  figure 
of  I  Thess.  5  :  4-10  of  the  sons  of  light,  clad  in  armor  and 
waiting  for  the  great  Captain  of  their  deliverance,  derived 
from  Is.  59  :  17,  probably  through  the  mediation  of  an 
Isaian  apocalypse  quoted  in  Eph.  5  :  14,^  recurs  both  in 
Rom.  13  :  12  and  in  Eph.  5  :  9.  Paul  was  beyond  question 
the  most  creative  mind  among  all  the  missionaries  of  the 
new  propaganda.  But  we  have  no  need  to  exaggerate  his 
originality  in  the  face  of  his  own  statements  regarding  the 
common  element  in  "  the  preaching  of  the  cross."  ^  When 
we  compare  his  own  references  to  his  regular  type  of  mis- 
sionary preaching  in  i  Thess.  i  :  9,  10  with  Luke's  report 
of  it  in  Acts  14  :  15-17;  17  :  24-31,  and  this  in  turn  with 
Rom.  I  :  18-2  :  16  on  the  one  hand  and  a  whole  series  of 
Jewish  and  Christian  kerygmas,  extending  from  Pseudo- 
Aristeas  and  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  through  the  Preach- 
ing of  Peter  down  to  Aristides,  Tatian,  ad  Diognetum,  and 
Athenagoras,  we  see  that  there  was  a  regular  type  corre- 
sponding to  the  diatribe  of  the  Stoic  and  Cynic  street 
preachers.  And  Paul  is  not  superior  to  using  such  forms, 
just  as  Luke  assumes  that  he  would.  If  this  be  true  re- 
garding the  most  general  themes  of  missionary  proclamation, 
how  much  more  might  we  expect  that  renewed  occasion 
for  setting  forth  the  nature  and  grounds  of  his  gospel  of 
"justification  apart  from  works  of  the  law"  would  lead 
Paul  to  revert  in  Romans  once  and  again  to  the  line  of 
argument  pursued  against  the  Judaizers  in  Galatia,  albeit, 
for  the  reason  above  stated,  with  more  careful  attention  to 
the  logical  nexus. 

With  this  answer  to  the  opponents  of  the  authenticity 
we  have  already  answered  those  who  find  it  hard  to  believe 
that  the  Corinthian  correspondence,  and  perhaps  even  the 
Thessalonian  as  well,  could  have  intervened  between 
Galatians  and  Romans.     In  neither  case  was  there  any  such 

»  See  Bacon,  Story  of  St.  Paul,  1904,  p.  341  £f.        '  i  Cor.  15  :  11. 
28 


INTRODUCTION 


occasion  as  in  Romans  for  a  recapitulation  of  PauPs  sys- 
tem, as  against  Jewish  Christian  misrepresentation.  The 
Judaizers  do  not  seem  ever  to  have  reached  Macedonia. 
In  Corinth  the  issues  were  drawn  upon  other,  less  theo- 
retical, lines.  It  was  not  so  much  a  matter  of  the  doctrine 
of  justification  by  faith  and  the  obligation  of  the  law,  as 
of  local  contentions  and  of  Paul's  personal  authority.  To 
forestall  misrepresentation  in  Rome  Paul  felt  obHged  to 
present  a  full  statement  of  his  doctrinal  system.  Con- 
sidering the  line  his  opponents  could  not  fail  to  take,  it  is 
not  surprising  that  even  a  later  letter  should  show  more 
resemblance  in  its  doctrinal  argument  to  Galatians  than  to 
the  Thessalonian  or  even  the  Corinthian  letters. 

2.  Internal  Indications.  —  If  then  neither  the  references 
of  Acts  to  Paul's  "Galatian"  journeys,  nor  the  connection 
of  Galatians  with  Romans  oblige  us  to  bring  down  its  date 
to  Paul's  second  journey  down  the  Greek  peninsula,  we  may 
well  turn  to  the  Epistle  itself  for  such  intimations  of  con- 
ditions whether  of  writer  or  recipients  as  will  tend  to  fix 
its  date  and  occasion. 

It  has  been  already  intimated  ^  that  the  indignant  sur- 
prise of  Paul  on  learning  of  the  nefarious  work  of  the  Ju- 
daizers among  his  Galatian  converts  is  hard  to  reconcile 
with  the  idea  that  he  had  already  passed  through  the  ex- 
tremely trying  experiences  occasioned  by  their  inroads  in 
the  remoter  field  of  Corinth.  Also  that  the  necessity  Paul 
seems  to  be  under  of  relating  the  true  history  of  his  under- 
standing with  the  "pillars"  at  Jerusalem,  and  subsequent 
misunderstanding  with  Peter,  Barnabas,  and  "the  rest  of 
the  Jews"  at  Antioch,  together  with  the  extreme  harshness  of 
his  characterization  of  their  conduct,  are  opposed  to  the 
idea  that  our  Epistle  dates  from  so  long  an  interval  there- 
after. Some  five  or  six  years  later  we  find  Paul  pointing 
with  approval  to  the  example  of  "  Barnabas  "  and  "  Cephas,"  ^ 
and  very  strenuously  urging  his  "strong"  adherents  both 
in  Corinth  and  Rome  to  show  more  consideration  for  the 

'  Above,  p.  23.  »  I  Cor.  3  :  22;    9:5. 

29 


INTRODUCTION 


scruples  of  the  "weak,"  who  were  in  dread  of  contamination 
by  the  pollutions  of  idols.  We  intimated  above  the  im- 
probability after  this  of  a  renewed  exacerbation  of  Paul's 
feeling  toward  Peter  and  Barnabas.  We  have  now  to 
consider  whether  the  allusions  of  the  letter  itself,  mainly 
comprised  in  the  appeal  of  4  :  12-20  to  the  Galatians  for 
a  return  to  the  cordial  relations  which  had  subsisted  when 
Paul  "preached  the  gospel  to  them  the  first  time,"  can 
enable  us  to  fix  upon  any  particular  date  and  define  in  any 
closer  way  the  occasion  of  the  letter. 

It  appears  that  the  Galatians,  or  at  least  the  great  majority 
of  them,  owed  their  conversion  to  Paul's  own  preaching. 
He  had  been  their  spiritual  mother  in  Christ.^  Although 
in  I  :  8  ("we  preached")  it  is  made  apparent  that  his 
missionary  preaching  at  the  time  of  their  evangelization 
had  been,  as  usual,  in  company  with  another,  this  other 
cannot  be  included  in  the  general  expression  "all  the 
brethren  which  are  with  me"  of  ver.  2.  A  founder  of  the 
Galatian  churches  themselves  would  certainly  have  been 
distinguished  by  name,  as  are  "Silvanus  and  Timothy" 
in  I  Thess.  i  :  i;  2  Thess.  1:1.  These  latter,  companions 
of  the  "second  missionary  journey,"  Timothy  a  native  him- 
self of  southern  Galatia  (Acts  16  :  1-3),  must  also,  for  the 
same  reason,  have  been  away  from  Paul's  immediate  vicinity 
at  the  time  of  writing.^  That  the  former  companion  in 
question  was  Barnabas,  Paul's  fellow-" apostle"  on  the 
"first  missionary  journey,"  is  made  probable  by  the  ref- 
erences of  2  :  I,  9,  13,  the  last  of  which  especially  implies 
some  exceptional  interest  of  the  Galatians  in  Barnabas; 
otherwise  there  would  be  no  occasion  for  distinguishing 
him  among  the  general  mass  of  those  "  carried  away  by  their 
[the  Judaizers']  hypocrisy."  After  this  rupture,  or  at  least 
after  the  first  missionary  journey,  Barnabas  ceased  to  be 
Paul's  missionary  companion  (Acts  15  :  36-41). 

In  4  :  13-15  something  is  told  us  both  of  the  occasion 
of  Paul's  coming  on  his  "former"  tour  of  evangelization, 

'4:11,  14,  19.  '  See  below,  p.  48. 

30 


INTRODUCTION 


and  of  the  nature  of  his  reception.  The  evangelization  of 
the  "Galatians"  had  not  formed  part  of  his  original  plan 
of  campaign,  but  had  been  forced  on  him  by  an  attack  of 
illness,  whose  repugnant  character  might  have  been  ex- 
pected to  deter  them  from  receiving  his  message.  On  the 
contrary  they  had  given  him  a  reception  of  extraordinary 
enthusiasm.  Demonstrations  of  an  exceptional,  perhaps 
public,  character  can  alone  account  for  the  expressions  of 
4  :  14-15,  though  Paul  does  not  enable  us  to  determine  their 
exact  nature.  This  enthusiastic  beginning,  accompanied 
as  it  had  been  by  the  usual  "demonstrations  of  the  Spirit 
and  of  power"  (3  :  2,  5),  had  been  followed  by  severe  per- 
secution, doubtless  instigated  by  the  Jews  (3  14;  cf .  i  Thess. 
2  :  14-16).  The  churches  themselves,  however,  were 
principally  made  up  of  converts  from  heathenism  (4  :  8- 
10).  Some  of  these,  no  doubt,  had  been  gleaned  from  the 
class  of  "devout  persons,"  whom  the  Synagogue  habitually 
attracted  in  heathen  cities  by  its  simple  monotheistic  teach- 
ing, and  whose  defection  was  bitterly  resented  (cf .  Acts  18:7; 
19  :9).  Few,  at  all  events,  had  adopted  the  Jewish  mode 
of  life,  and  none  can  have  actually  submitted  to  circumcision 
at  the  time  of  Paul's  writing,  else  the  indictment  of  4  :  10 
would  be  graver,  and  the  threat  of  5  :  2  belated.  A  con- 
siderable element,  however,  of  the  original  constituency 
was  of  actual  Jewish  descent,  or  (Hke  Timothy)  of  mixed 
blood;  for  the  argument  of  3  :  26-29  is  clearly  directed  to 
the  unification  on  equal  terms  of  both  classes.  The  Jews 
must  have  been  among  the  first  converts,  for  after  rupture 
with  the  Synagogue  defection  from  the  Jewish  to  the  Gentile 
mode  of  life  maintained  in  the  Pauline  churches  could  occur 
but  rarely.  The  effort  in  progress  on  the  part  of  Paul's 
opponents  at  the  time  of  writing  is  an  endeavor  primarily 
to  reclaim  these  renegades  from  the  law  by  "  another  gospel " 
(i  :  6,  8-9),  which  under  the  name  of  Christ  should  pre- 
serve the  essential  features  of  Jewish  particularism.  They 
also  aimed,  however,  to  include  as  many  as  possible  of 
Paul's   converts   from    heathenism    (6  :  13).    At   Antiocb 

31 


INTRODUCTION 


the  reactionary  propaganda  had  already  met  at  least  a 
temporary  success  (2  :  13). 

At  the  time  of  Paul's  second  visit  the  Galatians  had  still 
been  "running  well"  (5  :  7).  Yet  from  the  references  in 
I  •  95  5  •  3(?))  21,  to  former  warnings  against  the  Judaiz- 
ing  reaction,  which  would  be  scarcely  appropriate  at  the 
first  visit,  it  is  probable  that  Paul  had  even  then  had  some 
reason  to  anticipate  the  invasion.  After  the  collision  in 
Antioch  (2  :  10-21),  nullifying,  as  Paul's  opponents  would 
be  sure  to  assume,  any  obligation  upon  them  of  the  Jeru- 
salem compact  (2  :  g),  there  would  be  reason  enough  for 
such  apprehension ;  though  the  indignant  surprise  expressed 
in  1 :  6 ;  3:1;  4 :  8-1 1  shows  clearly  that  at  the  second  visit 
the  interlopers  had  not  yet  made  their  appearance.  We 
may  perhaps  infer,  with  Zahn,  from  the  completeness  of 
Paul's  information,  coupled  with  entire  silence  as  to  its 
source,  that  a  delegation  from  the  Galatian  churches  them- 
selves had  presented  the  matter  to  him  in  person,  not 
realizing  the  intensity  of  opposition  the  proposals  of  the 
newcomers  would  arouse. 

Such  are  the  conditions  presupposed  by  Paul's  references 
to  the  recent  past.  They  can  all  be  met  by  the  supposition 
that  the  Galatian  churches  are  those  whose  founding  is 
related  in  the  story  of  the  First  Missionary  Journey  (Acts 
13-14).  Some,  such  as  the  references  to  Barnabas,  can 
be  met  on  no  other.  They  also  very  strongly  suggest  that 
the  Epistle  was  written  shortly  after  Paul's  first  arrival  in 
Corinth,  before  Silas  and  Timothy  had  come  down  from 
Macedonia  with  the  good  news  which  heartened  Paul  for 
his  great  task  in  that  city.^  If  the  comparatively  unruffled 
tone  of  the  Thessalonian  letters  seems  to  be  an  obstacle 
to  this  view,  inasmuch  as  they  would  then  be  later  than 
Galatians,  we  shall  be  obhged  to  suppose  that  some  tem- 
porary absence  accounts  for  Paul's  failure  to  include  special 
greetings  from  them  along  with  his  own.  It  seems  more 
reasonable  to  account  for  the  altered  tone  of  the  Thessa- 


Acts  18  :  1-5;  I  Thess.  3  :  6. 
32 


INTRODUCTION 


Ionian  correspondence  by  the  relief  occasioned  by  the  ready 
acquiescence  of  the  "brethren"  in  Paul's  views,  and  the 
cheering  news  brought  by  Silas  and  Timothy  from  Mace- 
donia.^ 

We  are  not  left  to  mere  conjecture  in  fixing  upon  the  first 
weeks  of  Paul's  stay  in  Corinth  as  the  date  of  the  Galatian 
letter.  As  Zahn  has  pointed  out,  i  Thess.  i  :  9  explicitly 
refers  to  a  "report"  which  has  come  echoing  back  to  Paul, 
from  places  "not  only  in  Macedonia  and  Achaia,  but  in 
every  place."  It  related  Paul's  own  missionary  successes 
in  Thessalonica.  Such  echoes  could  not  be  transmitted 
by  wireless  telegraphy.  They  came  to  Paul  in  the  person 
of  very  real  and  human  "messengers  of  the  churches" 
who  could  deHver  to  him  not  only  congratulations  on  his 
work,  but  reports  on  their  own,  and  on  conditions  in  the 
home  churches.  From  whence,  outside  the  Greek  penin- 
sula, could  the  echo  come  to  which  Paul  here  refers  ?  Surely 
from  no  other  region  than  that  of  Paul's  own  older  founda- 
tions, where  his  new  successes  would  be  greeted  with  the 
rejoicing  he  implies.  And  from  whom  should  we  most 
expect  the  congratulations  to  come  if  not  from  Lystra  and 
Derbe,  where  Timothy's  mother,^  and  the  elders  whose 
ordaining  hands  had  been  laid  upon  his  head,^  would  be 
longing  beyond  all  others  for  just  such  news  as  this?  The 
messengers  of  the  churches  whose  arrival  is  implied  in  i 
Thess.  I  :  9  will  be  those  who  brought  to  Paul  the  news 
of  Judaizing  reaction  in  Galatia.  They  may  be  the 
"brethren"  referred  to  in  Gal.  1:1. 

3.  The  Judaizers  and  their  Success  among  the  Galatians. 
—  If  the  church  at  (Syrian)  Antioch  remained  under  the 
influence  of  the  delegation  "from  James,"  ^  it  would  be 
almost  unavoidable  that  attempts  should  be  made,  as 
soon  as  Paul  himself  were  known  to  be  well  out  of  the  way 
(4  :  18),  to  prevent  the  loss  of  its  most  promising  mission 
fields.     Barnabas,  who  was  the  leading  man  in  the  Antioch 

'  I  Thess.  3:6;    Acts  i8  :  1-5.  '  Acts  16  :  1-3. 

3  2  Tim.  1:5,6.  *  Gal.  2  :  12. 

»  33 


INTRODUCTION 


church,  had  himself  participated  in  their  conquest,  and  had 
now  with  Peter  and  "all  the  rest  of  the  Jews"  definitely 
taken  sides  against  Paul.  For  ourselves,  at  least,  no  other 
inference  is  possible  from  the  silence  of  Gal.  2  :  11-21 
as  to  the  effect  of  Paul's  vehement  harangue.  He  speaks 
indeed  later  of  Barnabas  with  respect  (i  Cor.  9:6;  Col. 
4  :  10),  as  we  have  seen,  but  the  separation  in  spheres  of 
activity  seems  to  have  been  permanent.  We  learn,  in  fact, 
from  Acts  15  :  39  that  Barnabas  went  to  his  own  portion 
of  the  new  field  formerly  traversed  in  common,  Cyprus, 
which  henceforth  plays  no  part  among  Paul's  "churches 
of  the  Gentiles."  The  same  relations  of  respect  without 
contact  seem  to  be  implied  in  Paul's  subsequent  references 
to  Peter.^  We  have  no  more  trace  of  any  personal  inter- 
course between  the  two  apostles.  It  is  observable,  however, 
that  in  rebuking  the  schism  at  Corinth,  where  one  party 
vaunt  the  name  "of  Peter"  against  those  who  claim  to  be 
"of  Paul,"  Paul  avoids  any  treatment  of  the  issues  between 
himself  and  Peter,  confining  himself  to  a  "transfer  of  the 
figure"  of  the  different  builders  to  himself  and  Apollos  (i 
Cor.  3  :  4-4  :  6)  Moreover,  the  great  emphasis  laid  both 
in  I  Corinthians  and  Romans  on  the  duty  of  avoiding  offence 
to  the  "weak"  brother,  by  inconsiderate  application  of  the 
Pauline  principle,  "All  things  are  lawful,"  especially  in  the 
matter  of  "distinctions  of  meats"  and  the  "pollutions  of 
idols,"  is  very  noticeable.  It  can  only  be  for  the  benefit 
of  Jewish  Christians,  scrupulous  of  conscience  regarding 
Sabbaths,  holy  days,  and  meats  (Rom.  14  :  2,  5),  yet  peace- 
ably disposed  and  not  making  their  scruples  a  subject  for 
"doubtful  disputations."  Who  are  these  toward  whom 
Paul  shows  himself  so  considerate,  if  not  those  who  at 
Corinth  claimed  to  be  "of  Cephas,"  and  who  at  Antioch 
seem  to  have  remained  masters  of  the  field? 

It  is  a  different  type  against  whom  Paul  launches  the 
fierce  invective  of  Galatians,  Corinthians,  and  Philippians, 
denying  to  them  even  the  name  of  brethren,  calling  them 

»  I  Cor.  3  :  22;   9:5- 

34 


INTRODUCTION 


"spies,"  "ministers  of  Satan  disguising  themselves  as  angels 
of  light,"  "false  apostles,"  "super-extra  apostles,"  intruders 
in  the  ready-reaped  harVest-fields  of  others.  These  in- 
truders he  expressly  excludes  from  the  farewell  blessing  of 
his  letter  to  the  Galatians  (6  :  i6),  and  even  invokes  upon 
them  his  solemn  anathema  (i  :  9).  Had  we  Galatians 
alone  we  might  easily  be  misled  into  thinking  that  Paul 
classes  Peter  and  Barnabas  in  this  group.  Some  modern 
scholars  even,  who  base  their  views  too  exclusively  on  this 
polemic  epistle,  seem  to  imagine  that  Peter  and  even  Bar- 
nabas actually  joined  in  the  effort  to  impose  circumcision 
on  Gentile  Christians,  after  having  already  won  the  battle 
of  liberty  on  their  behalf  in  Jerusalem.  This  would  be 
"hypocrisy"  indeed,  and  not  only  cowardice,  but  cowardice 
without  a  motive.  But  the  later  epistles  enable  us  to  dis- 
criminate. The  Judaizers,  even  if  any  of  them  now  came 
from  Antioch  into  its  mission  field,  were  not  of  Antiochian 
origin,  and  did  not  appeal  to  its  authority.  "Those  of 
repute"  at  Jerusalem  were  the  authority  to  which  they  first 
appealed.  Later,  it  would  seem,  they  appealed  to  the 
example  of  Christ  himself  "after  the  flesh  "  (i  Cor.  i  :  12; 
2  Cor.  10  :  7;  5  :  16).  It  does  not  appear  that  they  ever 
claimed  the  support  of  Peter,  nor  even  of  James  after  Gal. 
2  :  12.  They  urged  that  Jesus  himself  had  been  a  Jew 
faithful  to  the  law.  Paul  too,  they  pointed  out,  would  admit 
that  Christ  had  been  "a  minister  of  the  circumcision" 
(Rom.  15  :  8).  In  the  letter  of  boasting  which  his  dis- 
loyal Corinthian  converts  compel  him  to  write  (2  Cor.  10  :  i 
-13  :  10)  to  offset  the  "letters  of  commendation"  which 
these  interlopers  displayed,  Paul  draws  their  portrait  with 
no  gentle  hand.  They  were  "Hebrews,"  "IsraeUtes," 
the  "seed  of  Abraham,"  "ministers  of  Christ."  They 
stretched  themselves  to  reach  out  into  another's  province. 
They  called  themselves  "apostles  (i.e.  missionaries)  of 
Christ,"  and  magnified  their  authority  to  take  tribute  of 
the  churches.  The  name  of  "James"  is  not  mentioned. 
Paul  could  not  bring  it  in  on  his  own  behalf  otherwise  than 

35 


INTRODUCTION 


he  has  done  in  Gal.  2  :  i-io,  until  a  personal  interview  with 
the  head  of  the  mother  church  (Rom.  15  :  30-32;  Acts 
21  :  18,  19)  should  clear  away  mutual  misunderstanding. 
James'  death  occurred  but  shortly  after  {ca.  62  A.D.). 
Judaizers  boasted  a  higher  name  (2  Cor.  10  :  7),  and 
perhaps  were  themselves  not  altogether  sure  of  the  ap- 
proval of  James;  for  on  at  least  one  critical  occasion  his 
verdict  had  been  given  against  them  (Gal.  2:9).  Cer- 
tainly Paul  was  hopeful  of  a  good  understanding  when  he 
"went  in  unto  James"  attended  by  the  delegates  of  his 
Gentile   churches    (Acts   21  :  18). 

At  all  events,  these  false  apostles  of  Christ,  and  not  the 
representatives  of  Antioch,  Peter  or  Barnabas,  or  any  of 
their  following,  are  certainly  to  be  identified  with  the  inter- 
loping Judaizers  whose  nefarious  work  among  the  Galatians 
during  Paul's  absence  (4  :  18)  ehcits  his  expressions  of  in- 
dignant surprise. 

We  are  fortunately  not  altogether  confined  to  New 
Testament  writings  for  our  conception  of  these  antagonists 
of  Paul  and  the  nature  of  their  opposition.  The  Clementine 
Homilies  in  their  present  form  of  about  200  a.d.  reflect  the 
hatred  then  still  cherished  among  a  Jewish  Christian  sect 
in  Palestine,  and  retain  certain  echoes  of  the  great  Petro- 
Pauline  conflict  in  the  rebuke  administered  by  Peter  to 
Simon  Magus  (a  pseudonym  for  Paul)  in  a  colloquy  which 
parodies  that  of  Gal.  2  :  11-21:  "If,  then,  our  Jesus  ap- 
peared to  you  in  a  vision,  made  himself  known  to  you  and 
spoke  to  you,  it  was  as  one  who  is  enraged  with  an  adversary 
(as  the  angel  opposed  Balaam).  .  .  .  But  if  he  did  appear 
to  you  and  taught  you,  and  you  became  his  apostle  for 
a  single  hour,  proclaim  his  utterances,  interpret  his  sayings, 
love  his  apostles,  contend  not  with  me  who  companied 
with  him.  For  you  now  stand  directly  opposed  to  me  who 
am  a  firm  'Rock'  the  'foundation  of  the  church'  ...  as 
if  I  were  a  person  manifestly  'condemned'  and  in  bad 
repute." 

Taken  with  Paul's  own  references,  particularly  in  the 

36 


INTRODUCTION 


sarcastic  comparison  in  2  Corinthians  10-13,  ^^en  this 
late  echo  of  anti-Pauline  reaction  will  throw  much  light  on 
the  plea  of  Paul's  opponents.  They  did  not  deny  "  visions 
and  revelations  of  the  Lord,"  nor  his  former  employment 
as  an  agent  of  the  church  in  Antioch.  But  Paul,  they  said, 
had  never  seen  Christ  after  the  flesh,  and  displayed  no 
"letters  of  commendation."  He  was  conducting  his  mis- 
sions now  on  his  own  responsibility,  not  venturing  to  claim 
support  (2  Cor.  11  :  7-9).  In  pretending  to  dispense  his 
converts  from  the  burden  of  his  support  he  was  really  dis- 
honest; for  he  obtained  afterwards  much  greater  sums  on 
false  pretenses.^  In  assuming  to  dispense  them  from  the 
obligation  of  the  law,  he  was  putting  a  violent  and  unau- 
thorized interpretation  of  his  own  on  the  Scriptures,  an 
interpretation  repudiated  by  all  "those  of  repute."  Jesus 
himself  and  all  the  Twelve  had  acknowledged  and  lived 
under  the  law,  whose  divine  authority  even  Paul  would 
admit.  Must  not  a  gospel  of  such  laxity  from  such  a  sec- 
ondary source,  they  asked,  be  regarded  with  the  greatest  sus- 
picion ?  Would  it  not  be  the  part  of  safety  at  the  very  least 
to  restore  to  it  those  divinely  imposed  conditions  of  salvation 
from  which  Paul  was  offering  his  dubious  dispensation? 

We  cannot  perhaps  wonder  quite  so  much  as  Paul  at  the 
promptness  of  the  Galatians'  inquiry  evoked  by  representa- 
tions such  as  these.  For  there  is  no  intimation  in  Galatians 
of  any  intentional  disloyalty,  or  denial  of  his  apostleship,  still 
less  such  an  attack  upon  his  personal  integrity  as  later  at 
Corinth  (i  Cor.  9  :  1-3;  2  Cor.  12  :  11-18).  Our  Epistle 
seems  to  bespeak  only  a  disposition  on  the  part  of  the  Gala- 
tians to  supplement  Paul's  gospel  by  certain  legal  ob- 
servances, and  a  failure  to  realize  how  much  the  term 
"apostle  of  Christ"  implied  to  their  founder.  As  yet  they 
had  adopted  no  more  than  the  Mosaic  sacred  calendar, 
doubtless  as  a  token  of  respect  for  "the  angels"  (see  on 
4  :  8-10).     At  all  events  little  stress  can  be  laid  for  the 

'  In  Galatians  there  is  no  intimation  that  the  charge  of  dishonesty  had  been  raised. 
This  appears  later  in  the  Corinthian  letters. 

37 


INTRODUCTION 


determination  of  date  upon  Paul's  indignant  exclamation 
in  I  :  6.  We  can  only  infer  that  the  time  was  long  enough 
after  Paul's  second  visit  for  the  Judaizers  to  learn  that  the 
coast  was  clear  and  to  intervene  with  their  nefarious  propa- 
ganda ;  and  short  enough  for  Paul,  who  certain  y  was 
never  long  out  of  touch  with  his  churches  (2  Cor.  11  :  28), 
to  be  amazed  at  the  rapidity  of  the  Judaizers'  progress. 

4.  The  Historical  Order  of  Events  in  Paul's  Missionary 
Career.  —  If  the  churches  of  the  First  Missionary  Journey 
are  Paul's  "churches  of  Galatia,"  Acts  13  :  1-16  :  5  is 
Luke's  account  of  the  Galatian  crisis  and  its  settlement. 
In  accordance  with  the  general  scheme  of  the  book,  wherein, 
as  we  have  seen,  Peter  establishes  the  precedents  for  Paul, 
these  chapters  constitute  a  parallel  to  the  story  of  Peter's 
work  among  the  Gentiles  in  Caesarea,  his  arraignment  by 
the  reactionaries  in  Jerusalem,  and  his  vindication  in  the 
first  Apostolic  Conclave  in  Jerusalem  in  Acts  9  :  32-11  :  18. 
So  with  Paul  in  the  work  of  evangelization  undertaken  by 
the  leaders  in  Antioch.  The  Holy  Ghost  directs  the  enter- 
prise; Barnabas  and  Paul  go  forth  and  reap  the  harvest; 
the  church  in  Antioch  sends  them  to  Jerusalem,  where  they 
vindicate  their  course  before  "the  apostles  and   elders." 

In  Appended  Note  B  ^  we  have  made  an  attempt  to  bring 
out  in  contrast  to  this  more  or  less  theoretical  account  the 
indications  of  Galatians,  and  to  some  extent  of  Acts  itself, 
of  the  historical  course  of  events.  The  main  differences 
concern:  (i)  The  number  and  occasion  of  Paul's  visits  to 
Jerusalem;  (2)  the  nature  of  the  transactions  between  him 
and  the  Pillars. 

(i)  Notoriously  Galatians  leaves  no  room  for  a  second 
visit  to  Jerusalem  of  Paul  and  Barnabas,  but  compels  us 
to  identify  the  conference  of  Gal.  2  :  i-io  either  with  that 
of  Acts  II  :  30;  12  :  25,  or  Acts  15  :  2.  As  between  the 
two  we  are  compelled  to  choose  the  former,  i .  Paul  clearly 
implies  that  it  was  the  first  time  he  had  been  in  Jerusa- 

*  Sec  also  my  articles  in  Amer.  Journal  of  Theol.  for  July,  1907,  and  January, 
1909. 

38 


INTRODUCTION 


lem  for  "fourteen  years."  2.  He  positively  declares  that 
the  business  which  took  him  there  was  a  private  matter 
transacted  between  him  and  the  three  "pillars"  without 
the  participation  of  any  ecclesiastical  assembly.  3.  The 
agreement  reached  had  exclusive  reference  to  the  mission 
field  which  Paul  and  Barnabas  were  to  occupy. 

This  leads  to  a  chronology  of  events  in  Paul's  mission- 
ary career  of  the  following  type: 

Conversion,  32  or  34  a.d. 

Sojourn  in  Arabia. 

Return   to   Damascus. 

First  visit  to  Jerusalem  for  conference  with  Peter,  34 
or  36   A.D. 

(Escape  from  Damascus  37  a.d.  or  later.) 

Missionary  work  in  Syria  and  Cilicia,  34-47  A.d. 

(Vision  of  2  Cor.  12  :  2,  41  a.d.) 

"False  brethren"  in  Antioch,  44-46  a.d. 

Barnabas  and  Paul  in  Antioch,  46-47  a.d. 

Second  visit  to  Jerusalem,  for  conference  with  the  Pillars, 

47  A.D. 

First  Missionary  Journey.     Founding  of  the  churches  of 
Cyprus  and  Galatia,  47-49  a.d. 
Peter  comes  to  Antioch,  48  a.d. 
Convocation  at  Jerusalem.    Delegation  "from  James," 

48  A.D. 

Paul's  rupture  with  the  leaders  at  Antioch.     49  a.d. 

Second  Missionary  Journey.  Founding  of  the  churches 
of  Macedonia  and  Achaia,  49-52  a.d. 

Stay  in  Corinth,  50-52  a.d. 

Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  50  a.d. 

Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians,  50  a.d. 

Paul  in  Ephesus.  Founding  of  the  churches  of  Asia, 
52-55  A.D. 

Paul  revisits  Syria,  Antioch,  and  Galatia,  52-53  a.d. 

First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  54  a.d. 

Paul  revisits  the  churches  of  Macedonia  and  Achaia, 
55-56  A.D. 

39 


INTRODUCTION 


Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  55  a.d. 

Epistle  to  the  Romans,  56  a.d. 

Delegation  to  Jerusalem.     Paul's  arrest,  56  a.d. 

(2)  Nevertheless  Luke's  story  of  an  Apostolic  Council 
enacting  "decrees"  which  settle  all  the  "trouble"  raised 
by  the  "believers  of  the  sect  of  the  Pharisees"  with  regard 
to  the  Galatian  converts,  so  that  Paul  instead  of  resisting 
Peter  to  the  face,  distributes  among  them  the  decrees  for 
to  keep,  quieting  the  opposition  of  "the  Jews  which  were 
in  those  parts"  by  circumcising  Timothy,  has  real  founda- 
tion in  fact.  In  Appended  Note  B,  the  relation  of  this 
convocation  and  its  "decrees"  to  the  private  compact  of 
Paul  and  Barnabas  with  the  Pillars  has  been  explained  on 
the  basis  of  a  comparison  which  aims  to  do  fuller  justice 
to  the  intention  of  each  narrator  than  is  possible  when  dis- 
agreement is  treated  as  a  priori  inadmissible. 

From  no  other  aspect  does  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians 
appear  in  so  inspiring  a  light  as  when  viewed  in  contrast 
with  Luke's  conventionalized  treatment  of  the  subject.  It 
burns  with  all  the  flaming  ardor  of  a  conflict  which  its 
author  feels  touches  the  very  continuance  of  "the  truth  of 
the  gospel."  It  reveals  the  very  soul  of  the  great  Apostle 
of  the  Gentiles,  admits  us  to  the  vicissitudes  of  his  wonder- 
ful career,  his  conversion,  his  sense  of  apostleship,  his  call- 
ing from  God,  his  "revelation"  and  "gospel."  It  shows 
his  battles  against  the  "false  brethren"  and  his  endeavors 
for  an  understanding  with  the  older  apostles,  even  at  the 
cost  of  conflict.  It  shows  his  tenderness  paving  the  way 
for  that  tactful  and  considerate  treatment  of  the  "weak 
brethren"  which  at  last  made  it  possible  to  hope  that  his 
"ministration  which  he  had  for  Jerusalem  might  be  ac- 
ceptable to  the  saints,"  and  that  he  himself  should  come 
at  last  "with  joy"  to  "find  rest"  at  Rome  (Rom.  15  :  30-33). 
For  all  that  bears  upon  the  life  of  this  great  second  founder 
of  the  faith,  there  is  no  introduction  which  can  compare  in 
power  and  pathos  with  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians. 

Because  it  thus  bursts  from  the  heart  of  the  great  apostle 

40 


INTRODUCTION 


of  liberty,  at  an  agonizing  crisis  of  his  conflict,  this  Epistle 
has  been  the  palladium  of  liberty  in  every  great  struggle 
of  the  Church  to  assert  the  right  of  "  the  sons  of  God." 
Luther  loved  it  as  his  "Katharine  von  Bora."  Religious 
democracy  will  forever  revert  to  it  as  the  indefeasible  magna 
charta  of  its  rights.  Nor  will  it  detract  from  the  service 
thus  rendered  to  religious  faith,  that  since  the  first  awaken- 
ing of  historical  study  of  the  New  Testament,  the  higher 
critic  also  finds  here  in  this  first  great  contemporary  docu- 
ment the  key  to  a  historical  view  of  the  origins  of  the  church. 

VII.  Analysis  of  the  Epistle 

In  spite  of  its  torrential  sweep  of  feeling,  the  Epistle  to 
the  Galatians  evinces  a  rigorous  logical  structure,  recognized, 
in  principal  outline  at  least,  by  all  students.     As  the  primary 
condition  of  an  adequate  understanding  of  the  document, 
we  may  exhibit  this  structure  as  follows: 
I.   Defence  of  Paul's  Apostleship,  cc.  1-2. 
i.   Preliminary,  i  :  i-io. 
(i)    Greeting,  i  :  1-5. 

(2)    Occasion  of  Writing  and  General  Thesis,  i :  6-10. 
ii.   Historical  Review  of  Paul's  Ministry  from  his  Con- 
version to  the  first  Outbreak  of  Oppo- 
sition, i: 11-24. 
(i)    The  Independence  of  his  Entrance  upon  his  Mis- 
sion Work,  I  :  11-17. 
(2)   His  Slight  Relations  with  the  Twelve  thereafter, 
I  :  18-24. 
iii.   Account  of  Previous  Oppositions  and  Paul's  Defence 
at  Jerusalem  and  Antioch,  c.  2. 
(i)   Indorsement  of  Paul  and  his  Gospel  of  Freedom 
from  the  Law  by  the  "Pillars"  at 
Jerusalem  and  Agreement  for  a  Di- 
vision of  Fields,  2  :  i-io. 
(2)    Rebuke  of  Peter  and  the  Rest  of  the  Jews  at  Antioch 
for  coercing  the  Gentiles,  2  :  1 1-2 1 . 
41 


INTRODUCTION 


(a)  The  Conflict,  2  :  11- 14. 

(b)  The  Argument  (transitional),  2  :  15-21. 
II.   Defence  of  Paul's  Gospel,  3  :  1-5  :  12. 

i.   Theoretical  Argument  against  Legalism,  c.  3. 

General  Statement  of  Principle.     The  Gift  of  the 

Spirit  is  the  Sole  and  Decisive  Test 

of  Heirship,  3  :  1-5. 
(i)   The  Abrahamic  Promise  Universal  and  based  on 

Faith,  3  :  6-9. 

(2)  The  Law  brings  not   Blessing,   but    Curse,  3  : 

10-12. 

(3)  Redemption  from  this  Curse  explains  the  Cross, 

3  •  13-14. 

(4)  The  Opponents'  Doctrine  makes  the  Law  an 

Afterthought  conditioning  the  Prom- 
ise, and  making  Unjustifiable  Distinc- 
tions between  the  Heirs,  3  :  15-29. 

(a)  Statement  of   the   Two   Principles,   3  :  15, 

16.       ^ 
(a)   The  Law  is  not  a  Condition  limiting  the 

Promise,  3  :  17-18. 
(p)   It  is  a  Discipline  to  develop  the  Heir, 

3  '  19-24. 

(b)  Conclusion:    Faith,   in   Emancipating  from 

this  Discipline,  nullifies  Distinctions, 
justifying  the  Very  Letter  of  the  Prom- 
ise, 3  :  25-29. 
ii.   Practical  Application  to  the  Galatians'  Case,  4  :  i- 
5:12.    ^ 

Restatement  of  the  Principle  of  Adoption,  4  :  1-7. 

(i)   Inference  as  to  Galatian  Observance  of  Days, 

4  :  8-11. 

(2)  Their  Changed  Attitude  toward  Paul,  4  :  12-20. 

(3)  Warning  that  Submission  to  the  Yoke  of  the  Law 

is  a  Return  to  Bondage,  4  :  21-30. 

(4)  Entreaty  to  have  done  with  Judaizing,  4:31-5:12. 
(a)    Vigilance  the  Price  of  Liberty,  4  :  31-5  :  i. 

42 


INTRODUCTION 


(b)  Circumcision  as  now  urged  incompatible  with 

Faith,  5  :  2-6. 

(c)  The  Agitators  and  their  False  Charge,  5  :  7- 

12. 

III.  Exhortation  to  Unity  in  Mutual  Service,  5  :  13-6  :  18. 
i.    The  Moral  Effect  of  Paul's  Gospel,  5  :  13-6  :  10. 

General  Proposition.  Christian  Freedom  is  under  the 
Law  of  Love,  5  :  13-15. 

(i)  Curbing  of  the  Flesh  is  a  Necessary  Result  of 
Dominion  of  the  Spirit  in  the  Indi- 
vidual, 5  :  16-24. 

(2)  It  will  also  insure  Unity  in  the  Brotherhood, 

5  :  25-6  :  6. 

(a)  This  Spirit  prevents  Friction  in  the  Church, 

5  ■  25-26. 

(b)  The  Rule  for  "  Those  who  Admonish,"  6  : 1-5. 

(c)  The  Rule  for  "Him  that  is  Taught,"  6  :  6. 

(3)  Moral  Seriousness  of  Paul's  Gospel  reiterated. 

Grace  does  not  supplant  Retribution, 

6  :  7-10. 

ii.   Autograph  Recapitulation  and  Farewell,  6  :  11-18. 
(i)   The  Judaizers  glory  in  Outward  Show,  6  :  11-13. 

(2)  Paul  glories  in  the  Cross,  6  :  14. 

(3)  The  Rule  of  General  Application,  6  :  15-16. 
iii.   Paul's  Scars  his  Talisman,  6  :  17. 

IV.  Benediction,  6  :  18. 


VIII.   Bibliography 


Introduction 


Bacon,  B.  W.  An  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament.  New 
Testament  Handbooks.  New  York.  The  Macmillan  Co.  1900. 
Pp.  54-71. 

JuLicHER,  Adolf.  An  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  New 
York.     G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons.     1904.     Pp.  32-200. 

Weiss,  Bernhard.  A  Manual  of  Introduction  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment. New  York.  The  Funk  &  Wagnalls  Co.  1889.  Vol.  I, 
pp.  234-250. 

43 


INTRODUCTION 


MoFFATT,    James.     The  Historical    New   Testament.  Edinburgh. 

T.  &  T.  Clark.     1901  (second  ed.).     Pp.  121-137,  ^5°- 

Shaw,    R.    D.      The    Pauline    Epistles.      Edinburgh.  T.    &    T. 

Clark.     1904  (second  ed.).     Pp.  63-126. 

Commentary 

LiGHTFOOT,  J.  B.  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Galatians.  New  York. 
The   Macmillan   Co.     1896   (tenth   ed.). 

Still  the  best  of  its  type.  Learned  and  philological.  Espouses 
the  North  Galatian  theory.  An  equivalent  commentary  on  the 
South  Galatian  side  can  only  be  found  in  the  German  of  Th. 
Zahn  (Kommentar,  Bd.  IX.  1905). 

Meyer,  H.  A.  W.  Commentary  on  the  New  Testament.  Galatians. 
Transl.  from  the  fifth  German  edition.  New  York.  Funk 
&  Wagnalls.  1884. 

HoLSTEN,  C.  Short  Protestant  Commentary.  Vol.  II,  pp.  254- 
320.  Galatians.  Transl.  from  the  third  German  edition. 
London  and  Edinburgh.     Williams  &  Norgate.     1883. 

Drummond,  J  as.  International  Handbook  to  the  New  Testament, 
Vol.  II,  pp.   189-242.     New  York.     Putnam's.     1899. 

Ramsay,  W.  M.  Historical  Commentary  on  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to 
the  Galatians.  New  York.  Putnam's.  1900.  See  also  s.v. 
"Galatia"  in  Hastings'  Bible  Dictionary. 

Ramsay's  work  as  a  historical  geographer  is  well  known.  He 
appears  in  the  New  Testament  field  as  an  ardent  advocate  of 
the  South  Galatian  theory,  and  as  apologete  for  the  accuracy  of 
Luke.  The  "Commentary"  aims  to  throw  light  "on  con- 
temporary history  in  the  widest  sense  —  the  history  of  religion, 
society,  thought,  manners,  education — in  the  Eastern  Provinces 
of  the  Empire." 

JowETT,  B.  The  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Thessalonians,  Galatians, 
Romans.     Vol.  I.     London.     John  Murray.     1859  (second  ed.). 

Rend  ALL,  F.  Expositor's  Greek  Testament.  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  121- 
200.     Galatians.     New  York.     Dodd,   Mead    &  Co.     1903. 

Adeney,  W.  F.  The  Century  Bible.  Vol.  IX,  i  and  2  Thessalonians, 
Galatians.  Pp.  58-154  and  257-339.  Edinburgh  and  London. 
T.  C.  &  E.  C.  Jack.     No  date. 

General 

DODS,  M.,  and  Findlay,  G.  G.,  in  Hastings'  Dictionary  of  the 
Bible,  s.v.  "Galatians,  Epistle  to  the,"  and  s.v.  "Paul  the 
Apostle." 

WOODHOUSE,  W.  J.,  and  Schmiedel,  P.  W.,  in  Cheyne's  Ency- 
clopaedia Biblica,  s.v.  "Galatia"  and  "Galatians  (the  Epistle),'* 

44 


INTRODUCTION 


Hatch,  E.,  and  Van  Manen,  W.  C,  ibid.  s.v.  "Paul,"  and  s.v. 

"Romans." 
Knowling,  R.  J.     Witness  of  the  Epistles.     London  and  New  York. 

Longmans,  Green  &  Co.     1892. 
Weinel,  H.     St.  Paul,  the  Man  and  his  Work.     New  York.     G.  P. 

Putnam's  Sons.     1906. 
CoNYBEARE  AND  HowsoN.     Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul.     New 

York.     Chas.    Scribner's   Sons.     1894. 
Cone,  O.     Paul  the  Man,  the  Missionary  and  the  Teacher.     New 

York.     The  Macmillan  Co.     1898. 
Sabatier,  a.     The  Apostle  Paul.     New  York.     James  Pott   &  Co. 

1891. 
Wrede,   W.     Paul.     London.     Philip  Green.     1907. 
Baur,  F.  C.     Paul  the  Apostle  of  Jesus  Christ.     (Translation  from 

the  second  German  ed.)      London  and  Edinburgh.     Williams 

&  Norgate.     1876. 
Renan,  E.     St.  Paul.     New  York.     G.  W.  Carleton.     1869. 
Pfleiderer,    O.      Paulinism.      London.      Williams    &    Norgate. 

1891. 
Stevens,    G.    B.     The    Pauline    Theology.     New    York.     Chas. 

Scribner's   Sons.     1894. 
Bruce,  A.  B.     St.  Paul's  Conception  of  Christianity.     New  York. 

Chas.  Scribner's  Sons.     1894. 
Du  BosE,  W.  P.     The  Gospel  according  to  St.  Paul.     New  York. 

Longmans,  Green  &  Co.     1907. 


45 


THE   EPISTLE   TO   THE   GALATIANS 

I.  The  Apostleship  claimed  by  Paul  not  a  Matter 
OF  Human  Authorization.    Before  the  Pres- 
ent Reaction   began   he   had   already 
shown    the    Independence    of    his 
Calling   and   the    Divine    Au- 
thority   OF    HIS    Message 
and  twice  vindicated  it 
before  the  highest 
Apostolic    Au- 
thorities, 
I  :  1-2  :  21 

I.   The  superhuman  origin  of  his  Gospel  is  proved  from  the 
history  of  his  conversion  and  missionary  career,  i  :  1-24 

1.        Paul,  an   °apostle   (not  from  men,  neither  through 
*  man,  but  through  Jesus  Christ,  and  God  the  Father, 

'  Or,  a  man 

The  Salutation:  Greetings  from  an  ambassador  of  heaven  to  churches 
founded  on  the  hope  of  redemption,  1  :  1-5. 

The  opening  paragraph  stands  by  itself.  Its  form  is  dictated  by 
ancient  epistolary  etiquette,  as  modified  by  Jewish  and  Christian 
adaptation  ("grace  and  peace"  for  the  ordinary  "greeting,"  Jas. 
1:1).  In  this  special  case  Paul's  customary  congratulations  {cf. 
I  Cor.  I  :  4-9)  are  omitted.  Per  contra  he  enlarges  upon  the  title 
"apostle,"  and  the  implication  of  the  expression  "Lord  JesusChrist" 
(ver.  4).  The  reason  is  apparent  from  the  implied  circumstances 
{cf.  ver.  11-12  and  2  :  21,  and  see  above,  Introduction,  p.  31). 

I.  Apostle.  The  term  owes  its  loftier  significance  to  Paul,  who  in 
face  of  opponents  that  deny  his  "delegation"  by  any  responsible 
body  (i  Cor.  9  :  1-3),  replies  that  he  is  an  apostle  {i.e.,  "delegate") 

47 


EPISTLE   TO   THE   GALATIANS 


2.  who  raised  him  from  the  dead),  and  all  °the  brethren 
which   are   with   me,    unto    °the   churches   of   Galatia: 

3.  Grace  to  you  and  peace  ^  from  God  the  Father,  and 

4.  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  °gave  himself  ^  for  our  sins, 

^from  Cod  our  Father,  and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ     '  Or,  on  behalf  of 

from  God.  The  raising  of  Jesus  and  manifestation  of  him  to  Paul 
constituted  the  latter  a  "  delegate."  For  two  generations  the  ordi- 
nary sense  of  the  term  "apostle,"  a  Greek  word  naturally  applied  by 
the  Gentile  churches  to  all  duly  accredited  travelling  evangelists, 
continued  alongside  the  special  (Rom.  16  :  7;  i  Thess.  2:6;  Acts 
14 :  14;  Teaching  of  the  Twelve,  11  :  3-4).  Gradually  it  was  restricted 
to  the  Twelve  as  having  been  the  original  "delegates"  of  Jesus. 
Where  Paul's  authority  has  remained  unquestioned  he  does  not 
advance  his  claim  to  the  title  ( I  Thess.  1:1;  2  Thess.  1:1;  Philem.  i). 
Here  he  insists  upon  it,  but  in  a  sublimated  sense. 

2.  The  brethren  which  are  with  me.  Silas  and  Timothy,  so  well 
known  to  the  Galatians,  would  be  mentioned  by  name  if  present 
at  the  time  (c/.  i  and  2  Thess.  1:1).  The  Galatians  are  supposed 
to  know  who  are  meant.  Probably  their  own  messengers  are  in- 
cluded.    See  Introduction,  p.  33. 

3.  The  churches  of  Galatia.  Probably  those  whose  foundation  is 
related  in  Acts  13-14  are  principally  addressed.  See  Introduction, 
p.  18  ff.    The  letter  is  intended  for  circulation  over  a  large  district. 

4.  This  verse  is  added  to  the  more  or  less  conventional  form  of 
salutation  already  current  (ver.  3 ;  cf.  Rom.  1:7;!  Cor.  1:312  Cor. 
1:2;  etc.)  to  give  it  exceptional  solemnity.  Emphasis  is  laid  upon 
the  self-surrender  of  Jesus  to  death  as  the  divinely  appointed  means 
of  deliverance  from  the  evil  fate  of  the  world,  because  the  reactionary 
teachers  were  making  this  doctrine  of  "grace"  void;   cf.  2  :  21. 

Gave  himself  for  our  sins.  The  doctrine  of  the  vicariousness  of 
the  suffering  of  Jesus  was  one  which  Paul  "received"  at  the  outset 
from  the  believers  whom  he  had  been  persecuting  (i  Cor.  15  :  3). 
Without  some  such  apologetic,  primitive  faith  in  Jesus  as  the  Christ 
could  not  have  survived  the  assaults  of  Judaism.  But  Paul  always 
avoids  the  cruder  form  of  the  doctrine  which  may  be  called  the  "sub- 
stitutionary." In  this  form  Jesus  is  said  to  have  died  "in  our  stead" 
(anti),  as  against  the  Pauline  "for  us"  (peri)  or  "for  our  advantage" 
(hyper)  (see  on  2  :  16).  In  non-Pauline  writings  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment it  rests  upon  the  Isaian  doctrine  of  the  Suffering  Servant  (Is. 
53  :  4-6,  11).  This  doctrine  of  substitution  is  pre-Christian.  It  had 
been  used  by  the  authors  of  second  and  fourth  Maccabees  to  explain  the 
sufferingsof  the  Maccabean  martyrs  (2  Mace.  7:  37  f.;  4  Mace.  6:  29). 

48 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


that  he  might  deliver  us  out  of  °this  present  evil  ^  world, 
according  to  the  will  of  our  God  and  Father :  °to  whom 
be  the  glory  ^for  ever  and  ever.     °Amen. 


Or,  age      '  Gr.  unto  the  ages  of  the  ages. 


In  Mark  and  i  Peter  (Mk.  lo  :  45;  14  :  24;  i  Pt.  2  :  24)  the  very 
phraseology  of  Isaiah  is  applied  to  the  death  of  Jesus.  Paul  seems  to 
take  special  pains  to  avoid  both  the  phraseology  and  the  implications 
of  the  substitutionary  theory,  conceiving  the  suffering  of  Jesus  in  a 
more  moral  sense  (see  on  2  :  21;  3  :  13  f.)-  But  to  Paul  also  the  evil 
conditions  out  of  which  the  sons  of  God  must  be  delivered  were  the 
consequence  of  "our  sins,"  and  "our  sins"  are  therefore  the  ultimate 
explanation  of  Christ's  suffering,  so  that  the  Old  Testament  descrip- 
tion of  sacrifice  as  "for  {peri)  sin"  becomes  appropriate  (c/.  Eph,  5  :  2). 
In  fact  the  whole  story  of  Jesus'  earthly  career  and  fate  is  for  Paul 
almost  lost  in  the  excelling  glory  of  the  supramundane  drama.  For 
him  the  gospel  consists  essentially  of  nothing  else  but  the  transaction 
by  which  the  preexistent  Son  of  God  obediently  humbled  himself 
unto  incarnation  and  death,  and  was  for  this  reason  exalted  to  God's 
right  hand  (c/.  Phil.  2  :  5-1 1).  This  cosmic  drama  is  conceived  under 
the  forms  of  Israel's  redemption  from  bondage  in  Egypt;    cf.  Eph. 

1  :  5-14;  I  Cor.  10  :  1-6;  5  :  7.  Thus  ver.  i  expresses  Paul's  apostle- 
ship  in  a  nutshell,  ver.  4  his  message. 

This  present  evil  world.  Rabbinic  doctrine  distinguished  between 
"  this  world  "  (or  "  age  "),  subjected  to  demonic  powers  (4  :  1-5), 
Rom.  8  :  20),  and  the  "  age  to  come,"  which  after  victory  over  these 
should  be  under  the  direct  rule  of  God  and  his  Christ  (4:9;  Heb. 

2  :  5-8).  The  revelation  of  this  Christ,  victorious  in  the  resurrection, 
is  therefore  by  implication  an  "  assurance  to  all  men  "  of  the  im- 
pending judgment  and  "  restoration  of  all  things  "  (Acts  17  :  30-31; 
I  Thess.  I  :  10). 

5.  To  whom  (be)  the  glory  for  ever  and  ever.  Or,  "  whose  is  the 
glory;  "  i.e.,  the  praise  rightly  belonging  to  this  deliverance. 

Amen.  The  doxology  with  its  Hebrew  response  {Amen,  "  Be  it 
so  ")  appears  already  naturalized  on  Gentile  soil.  To  Paul  this  is 
a  favorite  method  of  setting  a  period  to  his  sublimest  thoughts, 
especially  when  he  has  had  occasion  to  set  forth  the  redeeming  "  will 
of  God  "  {cf.  Rom.  11  :  33-12  :  2;  Eph.  i  :  6,  9,  11,  12;  3  :  19-21). 

The  Occasion  of  the  Epistle:  Incipient  desertion  by  the  Galatian 
churches  of  PauVs  gospel  of  liberty  for  that  of  the  Judaizers,  i  :  6-10. 

6-7.  These  two  indignant  verses  take  the  place  of  the  usual  con- 
gratulations on  the  readers'  progress  in  the  faith,  and  prayer  for  their 
continuance.  The  omission  is  paralleled  by  the  absence  of  any  com- 
E  49 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 


6.  °I  marvel  that  ye  are  so  quickly  removing  from  °him 
that  called  you  ^  in  the  °grace  of  Christ  unto  °a  different 

7.  gospel;    which  is  not  another  gospel:    only  there  are 
°some  that  trouble  you,  and  would  pervert  the  gospel 

8.  of  Christ.    But  though  °we,  or  an  angel  from  heaven, 

'  Or,  in  grace 

mendatory  adjective  qualifying  the  bald  "  churches  of  Galatia  "  in 
the  salutation.     Cf.  Rom.  1:7;!  Cor.  i  :  2,  etc. 

6.  I  marvel.  The  news  has  taken  Paul  by  surprise.  His  experi- 
ences with  the  work  of  the  Judaizers  at  Corinth  cannot  therefore  be 
taken  to  lie  between  the  second  visit  with  its  warning  against  "  another 
gospel  "  (ver.  9)  and  the  time  of  writing.     See  Introduction,  p.  33. 

Him  that  called  you.  The  "  calling  "  (clesis)  which  constitutes 
the  new  Israel,  or  commonwealth  (ecclesia)  of  Christ,  is  always  in 
New  Testament  thought  a  "  calling  of  God  "  {cf.  i  Pt.  5  :  10).  Here 
it  is  recalled  that  its  nature  was  "  grace,"  not  merit  (cf.  Eph.  2  :  5,  8). 

The  reading  of  R.  V.,  grace  of  Christ,  is  improbable.  The  gen- 
itive "Christ"  seems  to  have  been  added  to  determine  the  refer- 
ence of  the  participle  "him  that  called."  It  was  in  reality  a  "per- 
version of  the  gospel  of  Christ  "  {i.e.,  not  the  glad  tidings  about  Christ 
but  brought  by  him)  to  make  those  to  whom  he  had  proclaimed  for- 
giveness as  a  "Friend  of  sinners"  seek  to  win  that  forgiveness  by 
imitating  the  Pharisees!  Paul  was  true  to  the  primitive  gospel  in 
maintaining  that  it  was  "for  the  ungodly."  Obscuration  of  this  is 
the  denial  of  "grace";  cf.  Eph.  2  :  5,  8;  i  Tim.  i  :  15,  and  see  note  on 
2  :  16). 

A  different  gospel.  Etymologically  the  word  rendered  "different" 
means  other  of  two.  In  common  employment  it  seems  to  have 
connoted  difference  in  kind,  as  against  the  word  rendered  "another" 
in  the  next  clause,  other  of  many.  At  all  events  the  scornful  employ- 
ment of  the  phrase  shows  that  Paul  is  quoting  his  adversaries.  They 
had  offered  to  complete  Paul's  gospel  with  one  which  would  make 
the  convert  "perfect"  {cf.  3  :  3).  It  may  be  possible  to  render  the 
following  clause  "  which  is  nothing  else  but  that,"  etc.,  but  the  R.  V. 
is  preferable,  because  the  new  preaching  did  not  purport  to  contro- 
vert, but  to  supplement,  Paul.  His  answer  is.  No  second  gospel  can 
exist.  So  far  as  the  preaching  of  the  Judaizers  is  new  it  is  not  gospel. 
So  far  as  it  is  gospel  it  is  not  new. 

7.  Some  that  trouble  you.  Purposely  unnamed,  as  in  5  :  7,  10,  12 ; 
6:12.  In  4  :  30  it  seems  to  be  intimated  that  they  come  from  Je- 
rusalem.    At  all  events  they  were  outsiders.     See  Introduction. 

8.  "We,    Grammatically  this  should  refer  to  the  individuals  of  ver. 

5<> 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


should  preach  ^  unto  you  any  gospel  °^  other  than  that 
which  we  preached  unto  you,  let  him  be  anathema. 
As  °^we  have  said  before,  so  say  I  now  again.  If  any 
man  preacheth  unto  you  any  gospel  other  than  that 
which  ye  received,  let  him  be  °anathema.  For  am  I 
now  ^persuading  men,  or  God?  or  am  I  seeking  to 
°please  men  ?  ^  if  I  were  still  °pleasing  men,  I  should  not 


»  Some  ancient  authorities  omit  unto  you.  '  Or,  contrary  to  that  3  Or,  /  ■♦  Some 
ancient  authorities  add  /or.    s  Gr.  bondservant. 

2,  but  "we  preached"  shows  that  Silas  at  least  is  included  in  thought, 
though  the  clear  distinction  of  number  in  ver.  9  ("we,"  "I")  shows 
that  he  is  not  personally  present. 

Other  than.  The  preposition  may  mean  either  "besides"  or 
"against";  see  alternate  rendering.  If  R.  V.  be  followed  in  ver.  7, 
we  must  take  the  former  sense. 

9.  We  (var.  I)  have  said  before.  The  warning  is  more  likely  to 
have  been  given  on  the  second  of  the  two  visits  referred  to  in  4  :  13. 
Supposing  this  visit  to  be  that  described  in  Acts  16  :  6  we  can  well 
understand  Paul's  solicitude.  Silas,  who  had  then  joined  in  the  warn- 
ing, has  now  no  part  in  it.  See  preceding  note  and  Introduction, 
p.  32.  The  var.  "I"  has  inferior  attestation  and  is  of  interest  only 
as  showing  that  later  copyists  noticed  the  contrast  of  number  and 
assumed  to  correct  it. 

Anathema.  A  Greek  word  corresponding  to  the  Hebrew  herein, 
denoting  an  object  consigned  to  the  powers  of  the  underworld.  Cf. 
I  Cor.  5  :  5, 

10.  Persuading  men  .  .  .  please  men  .  .  .  pleasing  men.  The 
phrase  rankles  with  Paul.  It  had  been  applied  to  him  by  the  Judaiz- 
ers,  who  thus  turned  his  conciliatory  principle,  "All  things  to  all  men 
that  I  may  gain  the  more"  (i  Cor.  9  :  21),  into  an  accusation  against 
him.  In  5  :  II ;  6  :  17,  he  adds  further  intimations  that  there  are 
limits  beyond  which  conciliation  may  cease  to  be  a  virtue.  In  the 
form  "  man-pleaser,"  already  current  in  earlier  Jewish  literature 
(Ps.  Sal.  4  :  8,  10),  Paul  himself  applies  the  opprobrious  epithet, 
I  Thess.  2  :  4,  Eph.  6  :  6,  Here  the  sense  is :  If  they  tell  you  I  am 
smooth-tongued,  tell  them  I  say  —  and  reiterate  —  a  curse  on  the 
man,  or  the  angel  from  heaven,  who  perverts  the  principles  you  re- 
ceived from  me. 

(i)  The  superhuman  origin  of  Paul's  apostleship  and  gospel  proved 
from  the  circumstances  of  his  conversion,   i  :  11-17. 

51 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


11.  °  ^  For  I  make  known  to  you,  brethren,  as  touching  the 
gospel  which  was  preached  by  me,  that  it  is  not  °after 

12.  man.     For  neither  did  °I  receive  it  from  ^man,  nor  was 
I  taught  it,  but  it  came  to  7ne  through  "revelation  of 

13.  Jesus  Christ.     For  ye  have  heard  of  my  manner  of  life 
in  time  past  in  the  Jews'  religion,  how  that  beyond 

»  Or,  but  '  Or,  a  man 


11.  For.  This  better  attested  reading  of  the  R.  V.  (against  A.  V. 
"but")  connects  the  argument  now  begun  with  ver.  10,  justifying  its 
almost  violent  language,  and  thus  leading  over  to  the  systematic  de- 
fence. Paul's  gospel  tolerates  no  supplementation  in  principle  be- 
cause it  is  not  after  man,  i.e.  was  not  a  product  of  human  reflection  and 
adaptation.  This  conviction  is  the  basis  of  Paul's  indomitable  courage 
and  sublime  authority.  I  in  ver.  12  is  emphatic,  "As  for  me,  I  nei- 
ther," etc.  Ver.  13  indicates  in  what  sense.  Paul  alone  amongChristians 
had  been  a  persecutor,  i  Tim.  i  :  12-16.  He  spoke  out  of  a  unique 
personal  experience,  which  to  his  mind  was  susceptible  of  no  other 
explanation  than  the  miraculous  intervention  of  God.  A  much  later 
writer  seeking  to  vindicate  a  similar  authority  for  Peter  puts  in  the 
mouth  of  Jesus  a  declaration  so  closely  similar  to  that  of  this  para- 
graph that  literary  independence  is  inadmissible.  Peter  also  had 
received  his  manifestation  of  the  Christ  by  revelation  from  God  and 
not  from  "flesh  and  blood."  While  his  first  thought  had  been 
"after  the  things  of  men"  (Mk.  8  :  t^-x)  he  was  taught  by  a  "voice 
from  heaven"  the  true  nature  of  the  messianic  redemption  (Mt. 
16  :  17-19,  23;  17  :  1-8). 

12.  Revelation  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  genitive  is  probably  objec- 
tive, "It  came  to  me  by  God's  manifestation  of  the  risen  Christ,"  cf. 
ver.  I  and  ver.  16  and  2  Cor.  4  :  6.  Had  Paul  referred  to  instruction 
through  subsequent  "visions  and  revelations  of  {i.e.,  from)  the  Lord" 
there  would  have  been  imperative  occasion  to  mention  these,  as  in 
2  Cor.  12  :  1-4. 

13-17.  How  PauVs  gospel  came  to  him.  The  object  of  this  brief 
rehearsal  of  the  circumstances  of  his  conversion,  a  story  already 
known  in  general  outline  to  the  Galatians  (ver.  13),  is  to  justify  as 
divinely  authorized  that  doctrine  of  freedom  from  the  law  which 
Paul's  opponents  declared  to  be  his  own  later  addition,  a  concession 
designed  to  facilitate  his  propaganda  among  the  Gentiles.  The  coin- 
cident elements  of  both  "gospels"  are  not  considered.  While  still  a 
persecutor  Paul  had  of  course  not  been  ignorant  of  the  doctrine  of  his 
victims,  nor  of  the  general  career  and  teaching  of  their  Master.     In 

52 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS  i  :  15 

measure  I  persecuted  °the  church  of  God,  and  made 

14.  havock  of  it:  and  I  advanced  in  the  Jews'  religion 
beyond  many  of  mine  own  age  ^  among  my  country- 
men, being  more  exceedingly  °zealous  for  the  traditions 

15.  of  my  fathers.     But  when  it  was  the  good  pleasure  of       is.  49:1 

'  Gr.  in  my  race 

ver.  18  he  freely  concedes  his  wish  to  learn  from  "Cephas"  in  such 
matters,  which  were,  however,  to  him  always  secondary  (2  Cor.  5  :  16). 
The  point  in  dispute  is  the  conditions  of  salvation.  Do  they,  or  do 
they  not,  include  "works  of  the  law"?  The  reversal  of  Paul's  con- 
viction on  this  point  was  far  from  having  been  a  later  concession  to 
Gentile  prejudices.  It  was  not  derived  from  human  teachers  such  as 
Stephen,  Ananias  of  Damascus,  or  Barnabas ;  nor  even  from  conscious 
reflection  in  Paul's  own  mind.  It  had  been  involved  in  the  sudden 
manifestation  of  God's  Son  "in"  him,  an  answer  for  which  Paul  him- 
self had  been  totally  unprepared,  to  the  despairing  struggle  of  his  soul 
after  "righteousness,"  Rom.  7  :  15-25  ;  Phil.  3  :  8-1 1.  It  had  been  (to 
Paul)  the  most  vital  element  of  that  revelation.  Hence  from  the  very 
outset,  and  consistently,  and  by  divine  authorization,  Paul's  gospel 
had  been  "without  the  law,"  a  commission  distinctively  "to  the  Gen- 
tiles ";  ver.  16,  Eph.  3  :  6,  8. 

13.  The  Church  of  God,  The  commonwealth  of  believers,  al- 
ready conceived  as  "the  Israel  of  God,"  6  :  16;  messianic  counter- 
part of  the  "general  assembly  "  (Heb.  qahal,  rendered  ecclesia,  i.e., 
"Church,"  in  Gr.  Old  Testament)  of  the  people  "called"  out  of 
Egypt.  This  Old  Testament  sense  seems  to  be  the  primary  one.  It  con- 
ceives the  brotherhood  as  "an  elect  race"  (i  Pt.  I  :  I ;  2  :  9;  Jas.  i  :  i) 
the  roll-call  of  whose  names  is  kept  in  the  (as  yet  )  heavenly  seat  of 
empire,  4  :  26;  Phil.  3  :  20;  cf.  Lk.  10  :  20.  From  it  is  derived  (not 
without  influence  from  purely  Greek  usage,  Acts  19  :  41)  the  second- 
ary application  to  local  subdivisions,  "the Church  in"  Rome, Thessa- 
lonica,  etc.;  "the  churches  of"  Galatia,  Asia,  Judaea  (ver.  22).  In 
the  case  last  mentioned,  the  distinctive  clause  "those  in  Christ"  has 
to  be  added  to  exclude  the  synagogues. 

14.  Zealous  for  the  traditions.  The  words  are  not  used  in  the 
technical  sense.  Even  if  it  could  be  supposed  that  Paul  would  ex- 
pect these  Gentiles  to  appreciate  the  technical  meaning  of  "Zealotry" 
and  "  tradition"  (as  against  the  written  law),  the  Zealot  party  was  not 
congenial  to  Paul,  and  comes  forward  at  a  later  date.  To  Greeks 
"the  traditions  of  my  fathers"  could  only  be  synonymous  here  with 
"the  Jews'  religion." 

15.  The  figure  and  phraseology  are  borrowed  from  Jer.  1:5.    Paul 

53 


i6  EPISTLE  TO  THE  GALATIANS 

1:5  ^  God,  who  separated  me,  even  from  my  mother's  womb, 

16.  and  called  me  through  his  grace,  °to  reveal  his  Son  in 
me,  that  I  might  preach  him  among  the  Gentiles;  im- 

17.  mediately  I  conferred  not  with  flesh  and  blood :  neither 
went  I  ^up  to  Jerusalem  to  them  which  were  apostles 
before  me:  but  °I  went  away  into  Arabia;  and  again 
I  returned  unto  Damascus. 

'  Better  authorities,  him.        '  Or,  away 

is  unable  to  explain  such  gracious  intervention  on  God's  part,  save 
in  the  light  of  his  entire  previous  career,  including  his  birth  and  en- 
vironment. So  peculiarly  did  they  fit  him  to  preach  Christ  among 
the  Gentiles,  that  the  unique  experience  through  which  he  alone  had 
been  brought  to  the  knowledge  of  the  Redeemer  must  be  attributed 
to  a  special  decree  of  divine  foresight  ("the  good  pleasure  of  God") 
whose  intention  must  be  construed  to  have  been  the  breaking  down  of 
the  barrier  of  the  law,  the  "middle  wall  of  partition"  which  still  oper- 
ated to  exclude  Gentiles  from  the  gospel  of  redemption.  The  fact 
of  Paul's  having  been  the  extreme  representative  of  legalistic  op- 
position to  the  gospel  of  grace  was  even  more  providential  from  this 
point  of  view  than  the  qualifications  of  his  birth  and  breeding;  cf. 
ver.  14. 

16.  To  reveal  his  Son  in  me.  Paul's  gospel  is  concerned  with  the 
person  of  Christ,  The  way  of  life  which  Jesus  taught  and  the  partic- 
ular incidents  of  his  public  ministry  are  to  Paul  of  secondary  impor- 
tance.    See  Appended  Note  A. 

17.  I  went  away  into  Arabia  ...  I  returned  unto  Damascus. 
"Returned"  implies  that  the  conversion  had  been  at  Damascus  as 
Acts  relates.  The  story  was  well  known,  as  ver.  13  implies.  Acts 
knows  nothing  of  this  journey  into  "Arabia,"  but  after  a  stay  of 
"certain  days"  in  Damascus  "with  the  disciples"  during  which  Paul 
proclaimed  Jesus  as  the  Christ  "in  the  synagogues,"  he  goes  at  once 
to  Jerusalem  "to  join  himself  to  the  disciples"  and  begins  an  unsuc- 
cessful work  under  their  direction  among  "the  Greek-speaking 
Jews"  (Acts  9:  19-30;  22  :6-2i).  The  grouping  of  paragraphs  in 
Galatians  also  suggests  that  the  first  three  years  (ver.  11 -17)  are 
thought  of  rather  as  the  time  of  Paul's  receiving  his  gospel,  the  next 
eleven  (or  fourteen?)  as  the  time  of  his  imparting  it.  We  need  not 
think  of  Elijah's  flight  to  Horeb  "the  mount  of  God"  as  in  Paul's 
mind,  though  he  clearly  contrasts  "Arabia"  with  "the  apostles  in 
Jerusalem"  as  possible  sources  for  his  gospel.  "Arabia"  is  simply 
the  kingdom  of  Aretas,  and  during  ^t  least  a  part  of  Paul's  earlier 

54 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 


i8.       Then  °after  three  years  I  went  up  to  Jerusalem  °to 

19.   ^ visit  ^Cephas,  and  tarried  with  him  fifteen  days.    But 

other  of  the  apostles  saw  I  none,  ^  save  °James  the 

»  Or,  become  acquainted  with      »  Western  authorities,  Peter.     3  Or,  but  only 

career  included  Damascus  itself  (2  Cor,  11  :  32,  t,^).  Paul's  escape, 
however,  was  probably  later,  during  the  period  of  missionary  ac- 
tivity in  "Syria"  (ver.  21),  for  Damascus  was  in  Roman  control  until 
37  A.D.  The  emphasis  here  laid  upon  Paul's  independence  of  Je- 
rusalem and  its  authorities  has  for  its  aim  the  very  opposite  of  Acts, 
where  the  dependence  of  Paul  on  the  apostles  and  his  intimate  and 
loyal  cooperation  with  them  until  "sent  away"  for  his  own  security 
to  Tarsus,  is  emphasized  as  the  proof  of  his  faithful  and  submissive 
service.  His  work  as  a  missionary  to  Gentiles  begins  after  Barnabas 
brings  him  to  Antioch,  on  special  revelation  of  "the  Holy  Ghost" 
(Acts  II  :  25,  26;  13  :  1-4).  On  the  difference  in  view-point  between 
Paul  and  Luke  see  Introduction,  pp.  11-19,  and  Appended  Note  B. 
(2)  Paul's  earlier  missionary  career  and  its  acceptance  at  Jerusalem, 
18-24. 

18.  After  three  years.  In  Acts  (9  :  26)  Paul  comes  to  Jerusalem 
in  flight  from  Damascus.  He  arrives  so  soon  after  his  conversion  that 
"the  disciples"  have  not  yet  heard  of  it;  and  comes  to  begin  his  work 
there  as  a  preacher  to  the  Hellenistic  Jews  (9  :  27-29;  22  :  17-20). 
By  his  own  story  this  coming  was  a  mere  brief  visit.  He  does  not 
appear  to  be  a  fugitive,  and  the  journey  has  no  relation  to  the  crisis 
created  by  his  conversion. 

To  visit.  The  alternate  rendering  aims  to  do  better  justice  to  the 
Greek  (historesai),  which  involves  the  idea  of  learning  the  "story" 
of  Peter,  who  is  here  called  by  the  name  "Cephas"  current  among 
Jewish  Christians.  If  Paul  has  here  the  intention  of  missionary 
work  —  and  the  analogy  of  the  subsequent  visit  with  Barnabas  sug- 
gests it  (2  :  2)  —  it  is  not  to  convert  his  unbelieving  countrymen  in 
Jerusalem  (Acts  22  :  6-21),  but  Gentiles  "in  the  regions  of  Syria  and 
Cilicia." 

19.  James  the  Lord's  brother.  Eldest  of  the  sons  of  Joseph  and 
Mary  mentioned  in  Mk.  6:3.  In  the  Jerusalem  church  the  kindred  of 
Jesus  early  attained  a  preeminence  long  preserved.  In  Gal.  2  :  9,  1 2 
and  Acts  12  :  17  ;  15  :  13  ;  21  :  18  it  is  implied  that  James  had  become 
head  of  the  local  brotherhood,  to  the  subordination  even  of  Peter.  On 
Paul's  earlier  visit  "  Peter"  is  the  leading  figure.  "  James"  is  only  one 
of  the  "others."  He  is  not  an  "apostle"  (travelling  evangelist)  but 
a  "pillar."  The  marginal  rendering  "but  only"  should  be  followed, 
for  the  exception  here  is  not  from  the  noun  "apostles,"  but  from  the 
force  of  the  verb  ("save  that  I  did  see,")  as  in  ver.  7,  and  2  :  16. 

55 


I 


20  EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 

20.  Lord's   brother.     Now   touching   the   things   which    I 

21.  write  unto  you,  behold,  °before  God,  I  lie  not.     Then 

22.  I  came  into  the  regions  of  °Syria  and  Cilicia.     And  I 
was  still  °unknown  by  face  unto  the  churches  of  Judaea 

20.  Before  God,  I  lie  not.  The  use  of  an  oath  indicates  how  great 
importance  Paul  attached  to  the  independence  of  his  career.  The 
accusation  against  him  was  not  that  he  had  not  formerly  been  all  that 
could  be  asked  of  a  missionary,  but  that  he  had  subsequently  departed 
from  the  true  doctrine  as  he  had  originally  received  it  from  the  Twelve. 
The  example  of  Acts  shows  how  even  the  friendly  disposed  might 
think  to  enhance  Paul's  authority  by  attributing  to  him  an  apostle- 
ship  "from  men"  (Acts  9  :  26-30;  13  :  1-3).  Paul  claims  to  be 
teaching  just  what  he  had  always  taught.  If  his  opponents  had 
taken  pains  to  ascertain  they  would  have  found  it  so.  They  assume 
that  his  gospel  could  not  go  beyond  the  teaching  of  his  predecessors. 
Luke  makes  the  same  assumption  from  a  different  motive.  Paul  con- 
tends that  it  went  beyond  theirs  from  the  start. 

21.  Syria  and  Cilicia.  The  Taurus  range  marks  the  true  boundary 
for  ancient  thought  between  Asia  Minor  and  the  Syrian  coast.  This 
coordinates  Cilicia  with  Syria  as  in  Acts  15  :  23,  41.  Paul  certainly 
conceives  his  work  by  geographical  stages  from  Jerusalem  {cf.  Rom. 
15  :  19),  which  may  account  for  the  mention  of  Syria  before  Cilicia, 
though  2  Cor.  11  :  32-33  strengthens  the  case  for  prolonged  mission- 
ary work  in  Syria  between  the  sojourn  in  Arabia  (ver.  17)  and  that  in 
Tarsus  (Acts  11  :  25).  But  the  principal  difficulty  with  the  phrase  is 
the  limitation  of  the  field  to  the  territory  south  of  the  Taurus  range. 
The  conflicting  representation  of  Acts,  which  places  the  First  Mission- 
ary Journey  before  the  conference  in  Jerusalem,  seems  to  rest  upon 
theoretical  considerations  already  explained.  CJ.  Acts  15  :  23  and  see 
Introduction,  p.  11  ff.,  and  Appended  Note  B.  We  may  reasonably 
infer  from  Paul's  silence  here  regarding  Cyprus  and  Galatia  that  his 
activity  had  not  yet  extended  beyond  "Syria  and  Cilicia."  The  visit 
with  Barnabas  to  the  Pillars  (2  :  i-io)  has  in  contemplation  a  field 
of  missionary  activity  in  which  the  evangelizers  wish  to  be  free  from 
the  annoying  intervention  of  the  "false  brethren." 

22.  Unknown  by  face  unto  the  churches  of  Judaea.  A  more  exact 
rendering  would  be  "I  was  becoming  unknown."  The  tense  (peri- 
phrastic imperfect)  does  not  of  course  cover  the  period  of  persecu- 
tion. "Judaea"  in  Pauline  use  (see  Introduction,  p.  24)  includes  at 
least  Caesarea  besides  Jerusalem,  and  thus  conflicts  with  Acts  9  :  30. 
But  the  instructive  difference  between  the  two  narrations  does  not  con- 
sist in  mere  items  of  detail,  which  by  those  so  disposed  might  individ- 
ually be  coerced  into  agreement,  but  in  the  general  contrast  in  point  of 

56 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


23.  which  were  °in  Christ:    but  they  only  heard  say,  He 
that  once  persecuted  us  now  preacheth  °the  faith  of 

24.  which  he  once  made  havock;    and  they  glorified  God 
in  me. 

2.  On  two  occasions  Paul  had  vindicated  his  apostleship  and 
gospel  before  the  highest  human  authorities,  2  :  1-2 1 

2.       Then  °  *  after  the  space  of  fourteen  years  I  went  up 
again  to  Jerusalem  with  °Barnabas,  taking  °Titus  also 

»  Or,  in  the  course  of 

view,  which  is  obvious  so  soon  as  each  is  read  by  itself.     See  Intro- 
duction. 

In  Christ.  Synagogues  also  might  be  called  "churches,"  and 
conversely.     On  the  Pauline  formula  "in Christ  Jesus"  see  on  2  :  4. 

23.  The  faith.  The  expression  is  on  the  road  toward  its  later 
sense,  a  form  of  doctrine.  As  yet  it  does  not  imply  more  than  an 
attitude  of  mind.  The  Christians  of  Judaea  heard  that  Paul  was  now 
inciting  to  that  disposition  of  trust  in  Jesus  which  had  previously 
enraged  him.  They  had  not  yet  cared  to  question  whether  he  re- 
quired his  converts  to  accept  the  law. 

24.  As  usually  happens  in  controversy,  each  party  accused  the 
other  of  inconsistency.  Paul  intimates  that  formerly  the  Jewish 
churches  were  very  well  pleased  with  his  work.  In  all  probability 
they  would  have  been  more  dubious  if  they  had  had  closer  acquaint- 
ance with  it.  The  Judaizers  accuse  Paul  of  inconsistency.  For- 
merly he  had  "preached  circumcision."  He  even  did  so  still  upon 
occasion,  when  it  seemed  politic  (5  :  11).  The  desire  to  make  easy 
conversions  had  led  him,  they  intimated,  to  forsake  the  true  doctrine 
as  he  had  learned  it  from  apostles. 

(i)  The  action  taken  by  the  Jerusalem  authorities  when  made  more 
closely  acquainted  with  the  nature  of  Paul's  work,  2  :  i-io, 

I.  The  identification  of  this  visit  to  Jerusalem  is  one  of  the  most 
vital  points  in  all  New  Testament  history.  (See  Introduction,  p.  15, 
and  Appended  Note  B.)  The  ordinary  supposition  that  the  "ministra- 
tion "  visit  of  Acts  II  :  30;  12  :  25  was  left  unmentioned  (!)  by  Paul 
though  of  real  occurrence  in  the  interval  between  i  :  18  and  2:1, 
is  made  incredible  by  the  solemnity  of  the  asseverations  in  i  :  20  and 
22.  Equally  incredible  is  the  dissociation  of  the  supreme  issue, 
for  the  settlement  of  which  Paul  made  the  momentous  journey  here 

57 


EPISTLE    TO  THE   GALATIANS 


2.  with  me.  And  °I  went  up  by  revelation;  and  I  °laid 
before  them  the  gospel  which  I  preach  among  the  Gen- 
described,  from  the  occasion  which  in  Acts  15  :  1-5  is  made  central 
to  the  whole  narrative.  It  is  impossible  to  admit  as  historical  this 
addition  of  a  third  visit  to  Jerusalem,  and  the  transaction  of  certain 
matters  explicitly  excluded  by  Paul's  definite  statements.  These 
matters,  however,  are  far  from  being  mere  fictions  of  Luke.  They 
are  merely  transferred  from  their  true  order  in  accordance  with  his 
theoretical  rearrangement  of  his  material.  See  Introduction,  p.  15, 
and  Appended  Note  B. 

After  the  space  of  fourteen  years.  See  alternate  rendering.  The 
Greek  is  ambiguous.  Paul  may  be  reckoning  from  his  conversion, 
I  :  15,  or  from  his  first  visit,  i  :  18.  The  apparent  division  of  his 
career  into  a  first  period  marked  rather  by  reflection  and  inquiry 
than  by  evangelistic  effort,  i  :  15-20,  and  a  second  marked  by  work 
in  Syria  and  Cilicia,  i  :  21-24,  is  perhaps  favorable  to  the  longer 
reckoning.  In  any  event  we  must  by  modern  reckoning  count  not 
fourteen  but  thirteen.     Ancient  reckoning  counts  both  termini. 

Barnabas.  The  name,  though  Aramaic,  is  strangely  heathen  for 
a  Levite.  In  Acts  4  :  36  it  is  explained  as  a  surname  given  "by  the 
apostles"  to  the  Cypriote  convert,  whose  real  name  was  Joseph. 
Apparently  by  combination  of  the  Aramaic  har  ("son")  with  the 
Hebrew  naba  (*'to  prophesy"  or  "exhort")  the  sense  "Son  of  exhor- 
tation" is  obtained.  The  name  is  really  formed  from  the  Syrian 
divinity  Nebo  or  Nabu  (cf.  A^'efewchadnezzar,  ATaionassar)  with  the 
prefix  Bar  (cf.  5arabbas,  5artimaeus,  Bartholomew,  5ar- Jesus). 
One  of  the  primitive  believers  in  Jerusalem,  related  to  Mary,  mother 
of  John  Mark,  a  man  who  had  consecrated  property  to  the  Church. 
Despatched  to  Antioch  because  of  rumors  of  its  Gentile  tendencies, 
he  espoused  the  liberal  side  and  reenforced  it  by  securing  the  accession 
of  Paul.  At  Antioch  the  two  are  commissioned  first  to  negotiate  in 
Jerusalem,  thereafter  to  an  evangelistic  campaign  in  Gentile  terri- 
tory. Until  the  great  exploit  of  Paul  at  Paphos  (Acts  13  :  6-12) 
Barnabas  appears  always  as  leader,  and  his  name  is  mentioned  first. 
Thereafter  we  have  not  "Barnabas  and  Saul,"  but  "Paul  and  Bar- 
nabas" except  in  the  letter  of  commendation,  Acts  15  :  25.  The  story 
of  Paul's  rupture  with  Barnabas  is  briefly  given  in  Gal.  2  :  13,  and  — 
with  a  different,  much  less  adequate  motive  —  in  Acts  15  :  27-29. 
Subsequently  Paul  mentions  him  with  respect  (i  Cor.  9:6),  but  there 
are  no  traces  of  resumption  of  the  cordial  relations  here  referred  to. 
The  terms  seem  to  presuppose  the  readers'  acquaintance  with  the 
man. 

Titus.  A  valued  lieutenant  of  Paul  only  less  prominent  than 
Timothy  in  his  later  missionary  work  (2 Cor.  2  :  13 ;  7  :  6, 13, 14;  8  :  6, 

58 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS  2  :  2 

tiles,  but  °privately  before  them  who  '  were  °of  repute, 
°lest  by  any  means  I  should  be  running,  or  had  run, 

'  Or,  arc 

i6,  23;  12  :  18;  2Tim.  4  :  10;  Tit.  1:4).  Timothy  is  fully  introduced 
in  Acts  16  :  1-3,  and  repeatedly  referred  to.  Titus  is  never  men- 
tioned by  Luke.  The  reason  is  probably  connected  with  the  fact 
that  Titus  had  been  made  by  Paul  the  example  of  what  he  would 
not  yield  to  Jewish  scruples  (Gal.  2  :  3),  Timothy  was  the  typical 
example  of  his  supreme  concession  (Acts  16  :  3).  In  fact  the  advan- 
tage taken  of  it  seems  to  have  made  Paul  regret  having  yielded  so  far. 

2.  I  went  up  by  revelation.  Whether  the  intimation  by  "the 
Spirit"  was  through  Paul  himself  or  some  other  "prophet"  in  the 
Antioch  church,  or  both,  and  whether  it  was  accompanied  or  not  by 
official  action,  is  immaterial ;  though  Paul  emphasizes  the  former, 
Acts  (characteristically)  the  latter  (Acts  15  :  2).  Paul's  omission  of 
reference  here  to  the  historical  occasion  (see  however  the  reference 
to  the  "spies"  in  ver.  4)  is  fortunately  supplied  by  Luke  (Acts  15  :  i). 
There  is  no  suppressio  veri.  The  point  made  is  that  it  was  no  lack 
of  authority  felt  by  Paul  himself  which  induced  him  now  to  submit 
his  gospel  so  long  preached  without  conference  with  "flesh  and 
blood"  (i  :  16,  17)  to  the  approval  or  disapproval  of  the  Jerusalem 
authorities.     He  did  so  by  divine  direction. 

Laid  before  them.  The  same  verb  as  in  i  :  16  without  the  reenforc- 
ing  preposition  (pros).  Paul's  gospel  was  not  submitted  for  altera- 
tion, which  would  be  inconceivable  to  him  (i  :  7-9).  If  with  the  most 
distinguished  English  commentators  we  render  the  last  clause  of 
the  verse  "  in  order  that  I  might  not  have  run  ...  in  vain,"  the  object 
of  the  visit  was  to  avoid  the  probable  frustration  of  his  former  work, 
and  the  threatened  interference  with  that  which  he  and  Barnabas 
had  in  contemplation.  If  we  render  it  with  German  authorities  as  an 
indirect  question,  "Whether  I  had  run  or  was  running  in  vain," 
the  object  was  to  obtain  the  acknowledgment  actually  received  from 
the  "pillars."  Had  it  been  refused  Paul's  conviction  would  not  have 
been  altered.  His  question  in  the  oratio  directa  would  have  been 
*'Does  it  seem  to  you  that  I  have  been,  or  am  running  in  vain?"  The 
distinction  of  tenses  in  the  last  clause  of  the  verse  is  intended  to  dif- 
ferentiate his  earlier  mission  field  from  that  now  in  contemplation. 

Privately  before  them  who  were  of  repute.  Again  we  note  the 
characteristic  difference  of  Luke's  point  of  view.  In  Acts  no  refer- 
ence is  made  to  any  conference  of  Paul  and  Barnabas  on  a  footing 
of  equality  with  "the  pillars."  They  merely  present  their  report  as 
delegates  from  the  Antioch  church,  submitting  the  question,  which 
js  then  settled  by  "the  apostles  and  elders"  without  their  participa- 

59 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


3.  in  vain.     But  not  even  Titus  who  was  with  me,  being 

4.  a  Greek,  °was  compelled  to  be  circumcised :  ^  and  that 


Or,  but  it  was  because  0/ 


tion,  What  shall  be  required  of  Gentile  believers?  The  result  is 
then  transmitted  to  the  consulting  church.  Paul  declares  that  he 
would  not  have  submitted  his  gospel  to  the  approval  or  disapproval 
of  any  man,  had  not  the  importance  of  keeping  "the  truth  of  the 
gospel"  intact  "unto"  the  Galatians  induced  him  to  "yield  for  an 
hour  on  the  point  of  precedence."  See  on  ver.  5.  Public  gatherings 
he  expressly  excludes.  If  such  there  were,  they  did  not  affect  the 
agreement. 

Of  repute.  Greek  usage  seems  to  require  that  something  be  tacitly 
supplied:  "reputed  (sc.  to  be  authorities)."  Ver.  9  uses  the  figure 
"pillars"  and  shows  that  James,  Peter,  and  John  are  chiefly  in  view. 
The  phrase,  though  probably  borrowed  from  Paul's  opponents  (see 
on  ver.  6),  involves  no  disrespect  for  the  apostles,  but  only  for  the 
opponents'  view  of  what  constitutes  "authority." 

Lest  by  any  means.     See  the  note  on  laid  before  them. 

3.  From  the  point  of  view  of  mere  grammar  the  introduction  of 
"was  compelled"  leaves  it  an  uncertainty,  for  moderns  ignorant  of 
the  facts,  whether  Titus  was  (a)  not  circumcised  at  all,  or  (b)  only 
that  it  was  not  a  matter  of  compulsion,  but  voluntary.  Practically 
the  former  (a)  is  certain.  The  whole  tone  of  the  narrative  shows 
that  Paul  would  have  regarded  it  —  and  justly  —  as  an  abject  sur- 
render of  the  principle  for  whose  defence  he  went  up,  to  yield  on  this 
crucial  point.  If  he  "yielded  for  an  hour"  (see  on  ver.  5),  it  was  not 
on  this  issue,  but  on  that  of  "rank"  (R.  V.  "subjection").  The  ad- 
dition of  the  clause  "although  he  was  a  Greek,"  strengthens  the  case 
against  the  idea  that  Titus  was  actually  circumcised,  and  also  sug- 
gests that  the  Galatians  had  not  the  same  acquaintance  with  him  as 
with  Barnabas. 

Was  (or  "had  been")  compelled.  The  tense  is  the  indefinite 
past  (aorist)  and  leaves  no  means  of  determining  when  the  attempt 
was  made.  The  context,  however,  makes  it  probable  that  the  pressure 
was  exerted  and  resisted  at  Antioch,  before  the  journey  to  Jerusalem. 
See  on  ver.  4,  and  cf.  Acts  15  :  1-2. 

4.  As  indicated  by  the  alternate  rendering,  there  is  extreme  diffi- 
culty in  determining  what  it  was  that  took  place  "because  of  the 
false  brethren."  Certainly  not  the  circumcision  of  Titus,  for  that 
Paul  would  have  resisted  all  the  more  because  of  their  demand. 
And  almost  certainly  not  the  refusal;  for  that  would  have  been  main- 
tained, false  brethren  or  no  false  brethren.  The  real  key  is  afforded 
by  the  textual  phenomena  (see  var.).    We  must  r.ead;   "But  on  ac- 


EPISTLE  TO  THE  GALATIANS 


because  of  the  °false  brethren  privily  brought  in,  who 
came  in  privily  to  spy  out  our  liberty  which  we  have 
°in  Christ  Jesus,  that  they  might  bring  us  into  bondage : 
5.  °Uo  whom  we  gave  place  in  the  way  of  subjection,  ^no, 
not  for  an  hour;    that  the  truth  of  the  gospel  might 

'  The  oldest  authorities  (western)  omit  to  whom,  no,  not. 

count  of  the  false  brethren  .  .  .  who  came  in  (at  Antioch)  to  spy  out 
our  liberty  ...  we  yielded  for  an  hour  on  the  question  of  preced- 
ence.'* That  is,  Paul  waived  temporarily  the  question  of  his  personal 
independence,  and  went  up  to  Jerusalem  to  lay  his  gospel  before  the 
Pillars  (cf.  i  :  16,  17).  This  statement  was  corrected  (probably  by 
Marcion)  to  ''did  not  yield,"  and  later  (to  improve  the  grammar)  to 
"to  whom  we  did  not  yield."  The  correction  was  thereafter  widely 
adopted,  because  the  yielding  was  supposed  to  be  on  the  point  of 
circumcising  Titus — a  manifest  impossibility.  But  the  earliest  wit- 
nesses to  the  text  indicate  that  it  read  "we  yielded."  Tertullian  {ca. 
210  A.D.)  denounces  Marcion  for  introducing  the  negative  "did  not 
yield." 

False  brethren  privily  brought  in.  Certainly  the  same  referred 
to  in  Acts  15  :  i,  who  "came  down  from  Judaea  (to  Antioch)  and 
taught  the  brethren,  saying,  Except  ye  be  circumcised  after  the  custom 
of  Moses  ye  cannot  be  saved."  The  doublet  (Acts  11  :  22-30)  sub- 
stitutes "prophets,"  after  the  pattern  of  15  :  32  and  21  :  10,  even 
borrowing  "Agabus"  from  the  latter  passage,  and  makes  of  what 
Paul  calls  his  "ministration"  or  "contribution  for  the  poor  among 
the  saints  that  are  at  Jerusalem"  (Rom.  15  :  26,  31)  a  parallel  by 
the  church  in  Antioch  to  the  famous  munificence  of  Helena  of  Adia- 
bene  on  occasion  of  the  great  Palestinian  famine  of  a.d.  45-46  (Jo- 
sephus,  Antiq.  XX,  ii.  1-5,  and  v.  2).  Paul  implies  that  local  dis- 
affection had  "brought  in"  the  reactionaries,  and  does  not  hesitate 
to  impute  to  them  the  motive  of  spying  upon  "our  liberty  which  we 
have  in  Christ  Jesus"  —  a  liberty,  of  course,  not  enjoyed  in  Judaea. 
The  issue  had  been  drawn  over  Titus. 

In  Christ  Jesus.  Paul  is  the  originator  of  the  striking  use  of  the 
preposition  " in"  with  the  name  of  a  persoru  He  employs  the  present 
expression  with  extreme  frequency  to  express  his  mystical  concep- 
tion of  union  with  the  spiritual  Son  of  God,  whether  individually 
or  as  a  church.  The  Christian's  life  is  in  a  living  organic  connection 
with  the  all-pervading  Spirit  of  the  Lord.     See  notes  on  3  :  26-29. 

5.  To  whom  ...  no  not.  The  omission  of  these  (Gr.  two)  im- 
portant words  in  the  chief  "western"  authority  for  the  text  makes 
a  decided  difference  for  the  clearness  of  the  grammar,  and  some  dif- 

61 


EPISTLE  TO  THE  GALATIANS 


6.  continue  °with  you.  But  from  those  who  ^  were  °reputed 
to  be  somewhat  f  whatsoever  they  were,  it  maketh  no 
matter  to  me :  God  accepteth  not  man's  person)  — 
they,  I  say,  who  were  of  repute  "imparted  nothing  to 

'  Or,  are       '  Or,  what  they  once  were 

ference,  though  not  a  vital  one,  for  the  actual  sense.  The  addition 
of  the  two  words  (if  unauthentic)  is  easily  explicable  (see  on  ver.  4). 
If  the  doubtful  words  are  authentic,  it  may  imply  that  a  new  attempt 
was  made  by  the  "false  brethren"  or  their  sympathizers  in  Jerusa- 
lem, but  does  not  affect  the  principal  point,  that  Paul  made  strenuous 
and  effectual  resistance. 

With  you.  Gr.  "unto"  {pros  not  para).  The  Galatians  at  the 
time  had  not  yet  been  evangelized,  but  that  the  truth  of  the  gospel 
might  remain  (unimpaired)  unto  them  as  well  as  to  other  Gentiles 
still  more  remote  it  was  imperative  that  Paul  should  yield  on  the 
minor  point  of  his  personal  precedence  (or  not  yield  to  the  demand 
that  Titus  be  circumcised). 

6.  Reputed  to  be  somewhat.  The  persons  referred  to  are  named 
in  ver.  9.  The  reiteration  (ver,  2,  6  bis,  9)  of  so  singular  a  designa- 
tion for  James  and  Peter  and  John  suggests  that  Paul  is  sarcastically 
quoting  his  opponents  (see  on  ver.  2).  They  had  declared  that  the 
real  authorities  would  not  indorse  Paul's  gospel.  The  Jerusalem 
conference,  as  Paul  says,  and  as  the  nature  of  the  compact  would 
suggest,  had  been  "private." 

Whatsoever.  So  R.  V.  rightly.  The  Greek  permits  the  alternate 
rendering,  but  the  context  is  opposed.  The  parenthetic  deprecation 
of  personal  comparisons  shows  how  distasteful  to  Paul  had  been 
even  such  concession  as  he  had  felt  obliged  to  make  to  his  opponents' 
methods. 

Imparted  nothing.  The  question  had  been  as  to  the  completeness 
of  Paul's  gospel.  Were  there  not  conditions  attached  to  the  offer 
of  salvation  by  "the  grace  of  Christ,"  which  he  had  suppressed? 
But  for  the  exception  noted  in  ver.  10,  which  certainly  is  not  a  "  con- 
dition of  salvation,"  we  might  explain  the  omission  of  all  reference 
to  the  four  "necessary  things"  prescribed  in  Acts  15  :  29  by  the  fact 
that  they  appear  to  be  asked  —  not  to  say  demanded  —  as  an  accom- 
modation to  Jewish  scruples,  and  not  as  intrinsically  necessary. 
The  nature  of  the  exception  is  such  as  to  exclude  specific  stipulations 
such  as  these.  Moreover  Paul  treats  the  whole  question  of  "meats" 
as  a  voluntary  concession  to  the  "weak  brother."  Although  not 
under  obligation  to  abstain,  he  and  his  will  do  so  to  avoid  putting 
a  stumbling-block  in  a  brother's  way  (i  Cor.  8  :  8-13;   Rom.  14  : 

62 


EPISTLE  TO  THE  GALATIANS 


7.  me:  but  contrariwise,  when  they  saw  that  I  had  been 
^intrusted  with  the  gospel  of  the  uncircumcision,  even 

8.  °as  Peter  with  the  gospel  of  the  circumcision  (for  he 
that  ^wrought  for  Peter  unto  the  apostleship  of  the 
circumcision  wrought  for  me  also  unto  the  Gentiles) ; 

9.  and  when  they  perceived  the  °grace  that  was  given 
unto  me,  °  James  and  Cephas  and  °  John,  they  who  *  were 

'  Or,  are 

14-17).  On  the  real  occasion  and  significance  of  the  "decrees" 
see  Introduction,  p.  12,  and  Appended  Note  B. 

7.  Intrusted.     Cf.  the  use  of  the  same  figure  in  Rom.  3:2;  2  Tim. 

1  :  12,  14.  Apostleship  itself  is  to  Paul  only  the  highest  of  the  "gifts 
of  the  Spirit"  (Eph.  4  :  11).  Peter's  and  his  own  rest  therefore  on 
the  same  basis,  not  an  appointment  even  by  Jesus,  but  "the  works  of 
an  apostle"  "wrought  for"  the  evangelist  by  divine  power  (ver.  8; 

2  Cor.  12  :  12). 

As  Peter.  The  change  from  "Cephas"  to  the  Greek  name  more 
natural  to  Paul's  readers  may  be  due  to  the  fact  that  in  ver.  7b-8 
they  are  more  directly  in  view.  The  later  conception  of  apostleship 
connected  it  with  the  earthly  ministry  of  Jesus  (Acts  1:21,  22),  and 
thus  inevitably  tended  to  place  Paul's  on  a  lower  plane  than  Peter's; 
cf.  Mt.  28  :  19;    Lk.  24  :  47-49;    Acts  1:8;    10  :  i-ii  :  18;     15  :  7. 

8.  Wrought  (Gr.  "energized")  for  Peter.  A  similar  comparison 
of  God's  "energizing"  for  Peter  and  for  Paul  is  traceable  in  the 
structure  of  Acts,  but  not  on  equal  terms. 

9.  Grace  given  unto  me.  I.e.,  the  spiritual  endowment  {charisma) 
of  apostleship,  recognizable  in  "the  signs  of  an  apostle."  These 
included  "signs  and  wonders  and  mighty  works"  as  well  as  more 
commonplace  evidences  of  a  "calling"  to  the  work.  (See  on  ver.  8 
and  cf.  2  Cor.  12  :  12.) 

James  and  Cephas.  Later  scribes  alter  to  "  Peter  and  James  and 
John,"  attempting  to  accommodate  Paul's  indication  of  relative  rank 
in  the  Jerusalem  church  to  that  derived  by  them  from  the  Synoptic 
Gospels.  In  reality  the  brother  of  Jesus  was  a  more  commanding 
figure  in  Jewish-Christian  circles  than  any  of  the  apostles. 

John.  The  only  New  Testament  mention  of  this  apostle's  name  out- 
side the  Synoptic  writings  and  Revelation.  His  enumeration  among  the 
"pillars"  tends  to  justify  the  shadowy  connection  with  Peter  effected 
by  "Luke"  (Lk.  22  :  8;  Acts  3 '■  "^^  3^  4,  n;  4  :  i3>  i?;  8  :  14),  and 
shows  that  the  martyr  fate  had  not  yet  befallen  him  which  is  predicted 
for  him  in  conjunction  with  his  brother  James  in  Mk.  10  :  39,  and 

63 


10  EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 

reputed  to  be  °pillars,  gave  to  me  and  Barnabas  the  °right 
hands  of  fellowship,  that  °we  should  go  unto  the  Gen- 
lo.  tiles,  and  they  unto  the  circumcision;  only  they  would 
that  we  should  °remember  the  poor;  which  very  thing 
°I  was  also  zealous  to  do. 

referred  to  in  a  recently  discovered  fragment  of  Papias  {ca.  150  a.d.). 
Outside  the  group  of  late  Ephesian  writings  more  or  less  plausibly 
attributed  to  "John,"  and  the  traditions  traceable  to  these,  we  have 
almost  nothing  on  which  to  base  a  judgment  of  his  character.  The 
only  incident  in  which  he  plays  a  separate  role  (Mk.  9  :  38-40)  is  one 
which  draws  upon  him  and  the  rest  of  the  Twelve  Jesus'  rebuke  for 
their  narrow  intolerance.  The  only  one  wherein  he  appears  with 
James,  outside  the  request  for  the  places  of  honor  in  the  kingdom 
(Mk.  10  :  35-45),  is  another  rebuke  for  a  narrow  and  vindictive  spirit 
(Lk.  9  :  54-56).  At  the  period  of  which  Paul  speaks  {ca.  50  a.d.) 
John's  conception  of  his  apostolic  calling  is  at  all  events  still  limited 
to  "the  circumcision."  This  extremely  meagre  mention  of  the  "Son 
of  Thunder"  (Mk.  3:17)  in  the  period  antecedent  to  Revelation  is 
hardly  compatible  with  any  far-reaching  activity  on  his  part  during 
Paul's  lifetime. 

Pillars.  Principal  supports  of  the  building.  Cf.  the  figure  in 
Rev.  3:12.     Clement  of  Rome  and  Ignatius  use  the  same  comparison. 

Right  hands  of  fellowship.  A  current  expression  (here  no  doubt 
accompanied  by  the  visible  act)  betokening  a  brotherly  covenant. 

We  should  go  .  .  .  and  they.  This  is  not  a  decision  enacted  on 
behalf  of  Barnabas  and  Paul  by  the  Jerusalem  authorities,  as  in  Acts, 
but  an  agreement  between  equals.  On  the  questions  settled  and  the 
question  left  unsettled  by  the  conference  see  Appended  Note  B. 

10.  Remember  the  poor.  The  form  of  the  request  is  general,  as  if 
involving  only  the  universal  duty  of  alms-giving  (one  of  the  chief 
"acts  of  righteousness"  in  Jewish  morality).  This  however  is  merely 
a  periphrase  to  avoid  the  direct  request  of  alms  for  their  own  com- 
munity. For  the  Pauline  Epistles  show  a  proportion  of  effort  be- 
stowed on  the  raising  and  transmission  to  Jerusalem  of  a  great  fund 
for  the  relief  of  poverty  in  the  mother  community,  which  would  be 
unaccountable  without  some  such  agreement  as  the  present  under- 
stood as  applying  locally;  (Rom.  15  :  25-28,  31;  i  Cor.  16  :  1-4; 
2  Cor.  8  :  1-9  :  15 ;  12  :  14-18).  It  became  indeed  so  prominent  in 
Paul's  work  as  to  furnish  one  of  the  chief  occasions  of  "  blame  "  against 
him  (2  Cor.  8  :  20),  and,  probably  for  this  reason  among  others,  is 
suppressed  in  Luke's  account  of  the  great  journey  of  "ministration" 
(Rom.   15  :  25,  31 ;  i  Cor.  8:4;    9:1;    cf.  Acts  11  :  29,  12  :  25). 

I  was  also  zealous  to  do.    The  tense  of  the  verb  (aorist)  does  not 

'  64  '  ' 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 


11.  But  °when  Cephas  came  to  Antioch,  I  resisted  him 

12.  to  the  face,  because  °he  stood  condemned.  For  before 
that  °certain  came  from  James,  he  did  eat  with  the 
Gentiles:  but  when  they  came,  he  drew  back  and 
separated  himself,  fearing  them  that  were  of  the  cir- 

13.  cumcision.  And  the  rest  of  the  Jews  °dissembled 
likewise  with  him;   insomuch  that  even  Barnabas  was 

14.  carried  away  with  their  "dissimulation.     But  when  I 

admit  a  determination  of  the  date  at  which  Paul  began  the  great 
work  which  culminated  with  the  fatal  journey.  It  might  even  be 
rendered  "had  been,"  implying  a  certain  basis  for  the  statement  of 
Acts  II  :  27-30.  From  i  Cor.  16  :  1-4  it  is  apparent  that  the  begin- 
ning was  early,  probably  forthwith  after  the  suggestion  by  the  "pil- 
lars." A  beginning  previous  to  the  date  of  Paul's  separation  from 
Barnabas  (Acts  15  :  39)  is  made  improbable  by  the  use  of  the  singu- 
lar, "we  should  remember  .  .  .  I  was  zealous." 

(2)  The  rupture  caused  hy  Peter's  inconsistent  conduct  at  Antioch, 
2  :  11-21. 

11.  When  Cephas  came  to  Antioch,  Probably  while  Paul  and 
Barnabas  were  in  Galatia.  See  Appended  Note  B.  The  question 
on  what  basis  the  Jewish  Christian  shall  hold  table  fellowship  with 
his  Gentile  brother  is  necessarily  subsequent  to  that  whether  the 
latter  shall  be  recognized  at  all.  Hence  the  incident  is  certainly 
later  than  that  of  ver.  i-io.  But  how  much  later?  In  ver.  12  Paul 
is  confronted  with  a  condition  of  affairs  in  Antioch  such  as  could 
scarcely  grow  up  without  protest  save  in  his  absence.  It  is  reason- 
able to  infer  that  Peter's  visit  to  this  church  occupied  in  part  the 
period  of  absence  of  its  two  great  leaders.     See  Appended  Note  B. 

He  stood  condemned.  I.e.,  self-condemned  by  his  inconsistency; 
cf.  ver.  18.  See  Introduction,  p.  36,  for  the  anti-Pauline  representa- 
tion of  this  encounter, 

12.  Certain  came  from  James.  Of  this  delegation  sent  from 
Jerusalem  to  Antioch  we  have  no  information  outside  the  present 
reference.  It  does  seem  to  imply,  however,  a  basis  for  Luke's  account 
of  the  Apostolic  Council  in  Jerusalem  and  its  "decrees,"  See  Ap- 
pended Note  B. 

13.  Dissembled  .  .  .  dissimulation,  Paul  uses  the  strong  ternx 
"dissimulation"  (Gr.  "hypocrisy"),  because,  as  appears  from  ver. 
15-16,  to  his  mind  Peter  and  the  rest  were  false  to  their  fundamental 
Christian  principles.  Later  and  cooler  reflection  must  have  convinced 
Paul  himself  that  he  did  them  injustice.  To  reason  from  the  knowl- 
edge "  that  a  man  is  not  justified  by  works  of  law  but  only  by  faith 

I"  65 


14 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


saw  that  they  walked  °not  uprightly  according  to  the 
truth  of  the  gospel,  I  said  unto  Cephas  °before  them 
all,  If  thou,  being  a  Jew,  livest  as  do  the  Gentiles, 
and  not  as  do  the  Jews,  how  °compellest  thou  the 
Gentiles  to  live  as  do  the  Jews? 
15.       We  being  Jews  by  nature,  and  not  °sinners  of  the 


in  Christ,"  that  therefore  it  is  "  making  void  the  grace  of  God"  to  seek 
to  have  all  the  credit  one  can  from  works  of  law,  might  be  logical  for 
one  who  had  had  Paul's  religious  experience,  but  it  could  not  be  ex- 
pected to  convince  men  like  Peter  and  Barnabas;  and  it  certainly 
did  not  convince  the  succeeding  generation,  Paul's  own  silence  as 
to  the  outcome  at  Antioch,  the  subsequent  dissociation  of  his  work 
from  Antiochian  support  (Phil.  4  :  15),  and  above  all  the  definite 
solution  of  the  questions  officially  communicated  by  Luke,  show 
that  Pauline  logic  remained  less  cogent  with  the  Church  than  Petrine 
authority.  Ultimately  the  practical  experience  of  the  Church,  com- 
bined with  the  dwindling  proportion  and  influence  of  Jewish  believers, 
led  to  the  relaxation  of  the  demands  of  James.  In  "Asia"  ca.  95  a.d. 
the  "burden"  is  restricted  to  abstinence  "from  fornication  and  things 
offered  to  idols"  (Rev.  2  :  20,  24).  The  early  Syrian  church  manual 
called  the  Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles  {ca.  120)  explicitly  makes 
abstinence  from  meats  optional  except  such  as  have  been  offered  to 
idols ;  "for  it  is  the  worship  of  dead  gods"  (Didache,  vi.  3).  Finally, 
the  second  century  recension  of  Acts  transforms  the  "decrees"  into 
merely  moral  requirements.  But  this  late  return  to  a  purely  Pauline 
standpoint  came  only  with  the  extinction  of  the  Jewish-Christian 
element  in  the  Church. 

14.  Not  uprightly  according  to  the  truth  of  the  gospel.  See  the 
preceding  note,  beginning. 

Before  them  all.  The  wrong  done  to  Gentile  believers  had  been 
public.  Paul  felt  that  its  effects  could  only  be  arrested  by  equally 
public  protest. 

Compellest  the  Gentiles  to  live  as  do  the  Jews.  The  whole  point  of 
the  charge  lies  in  the  fact  that  it  is  a  breach  of  the  fundamental  spirit  of 
the  Jerusalem  agreement  of  mutual  non-interference.  Those  who 
would  invert  the  order  of  2  :  i-ioandii-21  must  explain  why  it  should 
be  regarded  as  heinous  for  Peter  merely  by  clinging  to  his  Jewish  mode 
of  life  among  Gentile  believers  to  induce  them  also  to  adopt  it. 

How  the  Pauline  believer  of  Jewish  birth  *' became  as  without  law," 
ver.  15-21. 

Opinion  is  divided  on  the  question  whether  the  argument  of  ver. 
1(^-21  is  a,  report  of  v^^hat  Paul  actually  said  to  Peter  at  Antioch,  ox 

66 


EPISTLE  TO  THE  GALATIANS 


1 6.  Gentiles,  yet  °knowing  that  a  man  is  not  justified  by 
^  the  works  of  the  law,  ^  save  through  faith  in  Jesus 
Christ,  even  we  believed  on  Christ  Jesus,  that  we  might 
be  justified  by  faith  in  Christ,  and  not  by  the  works 
of  the  law:    "because  by  the  °works  of  the  law  shall 

'  Or,  works  of  law  »  Or,  but  only 

whether  the  direct  address  ends  with  ver.  14,  and  15-21  represents  an 
explanation,  addressed  to  the  Galatians,  of  the  PauHnists'  attitude. 
The  truth  probably  lies  between  the  two.  Direct  address  to  the  Gala- 
tians seems  to  begin  markedly  with  3:1.  On  the  other  hand  we 
have  no  other  example  of  so  long  a  quotation  by  Paul  from  his  own 
words,  nor  does  the  argument  employ  the  "thou"  of  ver,  14,  nor 
suggest  in  its  mystical  theologizing  so  much  what  Peter  could  really 
assent  to,  as  what  justifies  Paul  in  his  own  present  consciousness. 
We  conclude  that  Paul  is  using  the  privilege  of  the  ancient  historian 
to  present  the  substance  of  a  past  address  in  a  form  adapted  to  the 
general  enlightenment  of  his  present  readers  on  the  subject.  The 
distinction  is  indicated  in  the  text  by  spacing. 

15,  Sinners  of  the  Gentiles.  Paul  assumes  the  point  of  view  of  an 
unconverted  Jew,  to  whom  the  Gentiles  are  not  so  much  "trans- 
gressors" (Gr.  parahatai),  which  \/ould  imply  conscious  resistance 
to  a  clearly  perceived  moral  requirement  (so  ver.  18),  as  "sinners" 
(Gr.  hamartoloi),  i.e.,  men  out  of  harmony  with  the  moral  ideal,  known 
or  unknown.  In  the  parable  Lk.  12  :  47-48  they  correspond  to  the 
"  servant  which  knew  not  his  Lord's  will." 

16.  Knowing  {i.e.,  because  we  knew)  that  a  man  is  not  justified 
by  works  of  law  (so  alternate  rendering).  The  divergence  from  the 
type  of  teaching  attributed  to  Jesus  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels  is  more 
a  matter  of  form  than  of  substance.  It  is  true  this  theological  lan- 
guage might  fall  somewhat  strangely  on  the  ears  of  Peter,  and  he  and 
other  personal  followers  of  Jesus  might  well  be  tempted  to  resent  an 
attempt  by  Paul  to  prove  them  inconsistent  with  their  Master's  teach- 
ing. Nevertheless  the  real  consistency  was  on  Paul's  side  and  not  on 
theirs.  The  essence  of  Jesus'  teaching  had  been  to  substitute  his 
"easy  yoke"  for  the  "grievous  burdens"  of  the  scribes.  To  trust 
the  "Friend  of  publicans  and  sinners"  was  to  seek  access  to  the 
heavenly  Father  by  the  road  of  the  Prodigal  and  not  that  of  the  "  elder 
brother,"  On  the  Pauline  Doctrine  of  Justification  see  Appended 
Note  C.  Meantime  it  should  be  remembered  that,  while  Paul's  theo- 
logical phraseology  comes  from  the  schools,  his  underlying  conflict 
against  legalism  is  the  same  as  that  waged  by  Jesus.  Because  by 
works  of  law  shall  no  flesh  be  justified.      The  expressions  are  bor- 

67 


17  EPISTLE  TO  THE  GALATIANS 

17.  no  flesh  be  justified.  But  if,  while  we  sought  to  be 
justified  in  Christ,  we  ourselves  also  were  found  sinners, 
is  Christ  a  °minister  of  sin?     °God  forbid. 


rowed  (with  free  adaptation)  from  Ps.  143  :  2.  Works  of  law.  The 
observance  of  injunctions,  Mosaic  or  other.  The  distinction  of 
Christian  ethics,  as  Paul  perceived,  is  not  a  matter  of  the  number  of 
its  precepts,  whether  more  or  fewer  than  Moses';  nor  in  the  greater  or 
less  requirement ;  but  in  the  ideal  presented  —  to  have  the  disposition 
of  the  heavenly  Father.  This  alone  makes  men  sons  of  God  (Mt. 
5  :  45;  cf.  Eph.  5:1;  Rom.  8  :  14).  The  argument  itself  implies 
of  course  that  in  this  verse  the  alternative  renderings  must  be  preferred 
to  the  text  of  R.  V. 

17.  An  inference  of  the  objector,  to  which  Paul  opposes  a  strong 
expletive  (Anglice,  God  forbid).  The  expression  is  customary  with 
him  in  protest  against  false  deduction  (Rom.  3  :  4,  6,  31;  6  :  2,  15 ; 
7  :  7,  13 ;  9  :  14;  11  :  i,  11 ;  etc.).  The  opponent  cannot  see  how  the 
gospel  of  Paul  can  have  any  other  effect  with  Jews  than  their  moral 
degradation  to  the  level  of  heathenism.  If  the  Jew  be  taught  that 
for  justification  in  Christ  (see  Appended  Note  C)  he  must  first 
cut  loose  for  good  and  all  from  that  law  which  to  his  mind  alone  gives 
Israel  its  moral  superiority  (Ex.  ^3  '•  16;  Dt.  4  :  6-8),  his  new  faith 
will  tend  to  demoralization.  It  will  make  Christ  "a  minister  of  sin." 
This  is  the  "slanderous  report"  of  Paul's  teaching  referred  to  in  Rom. 
3  :  8,  which  Paul  repudiates.  Becoming  "as  without  law"  the  Paul- 
ine Christian  of  Jewish  birth  is  yet  "not  without  law  to  God,  but  under 
law  to  Christ,"  a  law  of  loving  service  (5  :  14,  6  :  2,  Rom.  13  :  8-10) 
which  gladly  imitates  the  spirit  of  the  heavenly  Father  as  shown  in 
Christ  (Eph.  4  :  31-5  :  2),  and  is  thus  identical  with  "the  righteous- 
ness of  God"  defined  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  (Mt.  5  :  43-48  = 
Lk.  6  :  27-36).    To  this  objection  Paul  returns  in  5  :  13-6  :  10. 

God  forbid.  The  question  arises.  What  is  negatived  in  the  repudi- 
ation of  the  inference  "  Christ  a  minister  of  sin"?  Is  it  one  of  the 
premises;  or  is  it  the  justice  of  the  deduction?  The  Greek  admits 
either,  according  to  accentuation.  Paul's  mode  of  reasoning,  how- 
ever, both  here  and  in  Romans,  and  the  "boastful"  expression 
"sinners  of  the  Gentiles,"  with  which  he  had  (almost  ironically) 
placed  himself  at  the  Jews'  point  of  view  at  the  outset,  requires 
the  latter  understanding.  Yes,  we  do  require  to  cut  loose  from 
the  law  if  we  would  be  justified  by  faith  in  Christ;  and  yes,  we 
thus  are  "found  sinners,"  no  better  than  Gentiles.  But  are  we 
to  infer  that  it  is  our  faith  in  Christ  which  has  made  us  such? 
Far  from  it.  We  were  so  all  the  time,  as  even  Scripture  itself 
subtly  indicates. 

68 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


i8.       For  if  I  °build  up  again  those  things  which  I  de- 
stroyed, I  prove  myself  a  transgressor. 
19.       For  °I  through  ^  the  law  °died  unto  ^  the  law,  that 

'  Or,  law 

18-19.  The  two  "fors"  are  at  first  confusing.  To  treat  ver.  18 
as  merely  parenthetic  would  simplify;  for  manifestly  ver.  19  presents 
the  true  inference  to  be  drawn  from  the  premiss,  'Faith  in  Christ 
involves  abandonment  of  the  law.'  But  Paul  has  two  inferences, 
the  one  self -stultifying,  the  other  true,  which  he  wishes  to  set  in  con- 
trast. The  former  is  that  of  his  opponents,  who  have  just  given  in 
the  person  of  Peter  an  evidence  of  the  inherent  inconsistency  of  their 
attitude.  It  is  needless  for  him  to  pursue  this  inference  further  than 
the  impasse  into  which  its  distinguished  leader  has  brought  himself 
by  his  attempt  to 

18.  Build  up  again  those  things  which  he  (I)  destroyed.  The  refer- 
ence  is  of  course  to  the  distinctions  of  the  law  regarded  as  lifting  the 
Jew  to  a  plane  of  ceremonial  purity  above  the  Gentile.  Paul  applies 
this  figure  of  tearing  down  a  wall  similarly  in  Eph.  2  :  14,  where  the 
allusion  is  to  the  stone  barrier  in  the  temple  excluding  Gentiles  from 
the  court  of  Israel,  broken  down,  as  Paul  holds,  by  the  death  of  Christ. 
By  attempting  to  rebuild  this  after  having  once  destroyed  it  Peter 
proves  himself  not  merely  a  "sinner,"  but  a  wilful  "transgressor." 
(See  on  ver.  15.) 

Why,  for  Paul,  abandonment  of  the  law  cannot  lead  to  sin,  2  :  19-21. 

19.  I.     Strongly  emphatic  in  the  Greek.     "I  for  my  part." 

Died  .  .  .  that  I  might  live.  This  paradox  is  the  fundamental 
thing  in  Paul's  religious  system  (cf  Rom.  6-8),  and  indicates  how 
completely  his  "gospel"  sprang  from  his  personal  religious  experi- 
ence. For  this  reason  it  was  the  more  difficult  to  apprehend.  To 
many  it  seemed  "veiled"  (2  Cor.  4:3).  Paul's  moral  struggle 
had  resulted  in  a  despair  which  he  can  compare  to  nothing  else  but 
"death."  The  comparison  is  something  more  than  mere  figure  of 
speech,  because  in  Paul's  case  (treated  as  normal  in  Rom.  7)  the 
moral  "death"  is  brought  about  by  the  discovery  "through  the  law" 
that  the  inherent  disposition  of  "flesh"  to  sin  is  in  all  the  race  of 
Adam  stronger  than  the  "law  of  the  mind,"  and  this  invariably  leads 
to  death.  A  longer  or  shorter  period  of  delay  may  intervene,  as  in 
Adam's  case,  but  sin,  the  "sting"  of  death,  is  a  poison  in  the  blood 
ultimately  working  physical  death;  though  God  "created  man  for 
immortality."  ^  The  remedy  is  the  infusion,  by  the  grace  of  God, 
of  "the  mind  of  the  Spirit,"  which  as  an  antidote  counteracts  the 

» Wisd,  of  Solomon  i  :  13-16;    2  :  23,  24.    Cf.  2  Cor.  5  :  5, 
69 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 


20.  I  might  live  unto  God.  I  have  been  crucified  with 
Christ ;  ^  yet  I  live ;  and  yet  no  longer  I,  but  Christ 
liveth  in  me:  and  that  life  which  I  now  live  in  the  flesh 
I  live  in  °faith,  the  faith  which  is  in  the  Son  of  God, 

21.  °who  loved  me,  and  gave  himself  up  for  me.     I  do  not 

I  Or,  and  it  is  no  longer  I  that  live,  but  Christ  &'c. 

poison,  "quickening  even  your  mortal  bodies."  The  proof  and  ex- 
ample of  this  is  the  resurrection  of  Jesus,  in  whose  case,  because  he 
"knew  no  sin,"  but  was  on  the  contrary  the  complete  embodiment  of 
the  Spirit,  even  the  body  was  miraculously  transformed  into  a  body 
of  *'  glory,"  exemplifying  the  change  ultimately  to  be  accomplished 
for  all  who  receive  the  adoption  of  the  same  Spirit,  and  foreshadow- 
ing the  accompanying  deliverance  even  of  the  creation  itself,  which 
"awaits  the  manifestation  of  the  sons  of  God  "  (Rom.  c.  8;  12  :  i,  2; 
Phil.  3  :  10-12,  21 ;  i  Cor.  15  :  21-23,  35-54).  In  the  briefest  possible 
form  this  whole  mystical  theory  of  redemption  is  embodied  in  the 
sentence  "  I  through  the  law  died  unto  the  law,  that  I  might  live  unto 
God." 

20.  A  more  specific  restatement  of  the  principle  of  ver.  19,  to 
show  its  bearing  on  the  present  case.  Paul's  gospel  does  not  promote 
sin,  for  the  act  of  faith  (filial  trust)  by  which  "the  Lord  the  Spirit" 
is  appropriated,  comparable  (at  least  in  Paul's  case),  in  its  agony  of 
separation  from  the  law  and  all  the  hopes  of  righteousness  it  could 
offer,  to  the  death  which  the  law  had  inflicted  upon  Jesus  as  a  male- 
factor, in  the  nature  of  the  case  involves  a  "walking  after  this  Spirit" 
(Rom.  8  :  3-9). 

Faith  which  is  in  (Gr.  "of")  the  Son  of  God.  Filial  trust  which 
rests  upon  the  revelation  of  the  glorified  Redeemer.  The  title  "Son 
of  God"  is  appropriate  to  the  cosmic  grandeur  of  the  conception. 
See  Appended  Note  C. 

Who  loved  me,  and  gave  himself  up  for  me.  Paul's  universalism  in- 
volves the  lifting  of  the  simple  story  of  Jesus,  the  Friend  of  Sinners, 
who  by  his  undaunted  championship  of  the  right  of  this  outcast  class 
to  full  "sonship"  in  "the  kingdom"  had  incurred  the  fate  of  impale- 
ment, to  the  cosmic  plane.  The  tragedy  is  no  longer  viewed  as  local 
and  specific.  It  is  the  drama  of  a  world-redemption.  Every  "sin- 
ner," even  "sinners  of  the  Gentiles,"  may  thus  appropriate  the  love 
of  God  in  Christ.  The  way  of  sacrifice,  once  conceived  as  Jesus' 
"setting  his  face  steadfastly  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem,"  assumes  larger, 
even  cosmic,  dimensions.  The  Redeemer  descended  from  highest 
heaven  to  nethermost  hell.  "  Though  he  was  in  the  form  of  God  he 
took  upon  him  the  form  of  a  servant  and  became  obedient  unto  death, 

7Q 


EPISTLE  TO  THE  GALATIANS  2  :  21 

make  void  the  grace  of  God:    for  if  righteousness  is 
through  ^  the  law,  then  Christ  died  for  nought. 

»  Or,  law 

even  the  death  of  the  cross"  (Phil.  2  :  5-11;  cf.  Gal.  4  :  4-5;  2  Cor. 
8:9;  and  see  Appended  Note  A). 

21.  A  reenforcement  of  Paul's  minor  premiss,  which  might  also 
seem  somewhat  open  to  question.  What  call  for  the  death  of  Christ 
if  redemption  could  be  had  without?    The  syllogism  is  as  follows: 

Major  premiss:  All  endeavor  to  be  justified  by  works  of  the  law 
is  hopeless. 

Minor  premiss:  Supplementation  of  faith  by  even  partial  return  to 
Mosaism  is  also  such  an  endeavor;  for  it  implies  distrust  of  the 
adequacy  of  mere  "grace,"  and  thus  "makes  it  void." 

Conclusion:  The  gospel  of  the  Judaizers  is  a  counsel  of  despair. 


71 


II.  Doctrinal  Argument,   and  Appeal  against  Re- 
action.   Paul  proves  to  the  Galatians,  from  their 
Experience  of  the  Spirit,  that  they  themselves, 
and  not  the  literal  descendants  of  abraham, 
nor  Such  as  seek  Justification  by  Works  of 
THE  Law,  are  the  true  Sons  of  God  and 
Heirs  of  the  Promises  of  Scripture.    He 
contrasts  the  Freedom  and  Zeal  of 
THEIR  Condition  under  Grace  with 
the    Bondage    of     Judaism,    and 
warns     them     of     the     conse- 
quences of  accepting  its  yoke. 

3:1-5:  12 

I.    The  Ahrahamic  inheritance  is  shown  to  he  a  prerogative 
of  those  who  have  faith  in  Christ  Jesus,  3  :  1-29 

3.       O  foolish  °Galatians,  °who  did  bewitch  you,  before 
whose  eyes  Jesus  Christ  was  °openly  set  forth  crucified  ? 

General  Proposition:  The  messianic  gift  of  the  Spirit  is  alone 
fundamental.      This  did  not  come  as  a  result  of  legalism,  hut  of  faith^ 

3  :  1-5- 

I.  Paul  now  turns  to  the  Galatians  themselves  in  direct  address. 
Galatians  is  the  only  term  by  which  the  mixed  population  of  Lyca- 
onians,  Pisidians,  Romans,  Greeks,  Jews,  and  Anatolians  in  the 
cities  of  Acts  13  :  14-14  :  24  could  be  addressed  with  courtesy. 
"Phrygians"  would  have  been  opprobrious. 

Who  did  bewitch  you  ?  A  figure  of  speech  to  express  the  unaccount- 
ableness  of  their  folly.  The  "evil  eye"  (Mk.  7  :  22)  was  supposed  to 
exert  the  fascination  of  a  serpent  which  "charms"  a  bird.  Some 
such  fascination  must  have  blinded  the  Galatians,  else  the  spectacle 
of  Jesus  Christ  crucified  by  the  very  legalism  to  which  they  are  now 
invited  must  have  deterred  them. 

Openly  set  forth.    Gr.  "placarded."     In  Rom.  3  :  25  God  makes 

73 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


2.  °This  only  would  I  learn  from  you,  Received  ye  the 
Spirit  by  Hhe  °works  of  the  law,  or  by  the  °^  hearing  of 

3.  faith?     Are  ye  so  foolish?  having  begun  in  the  Spirit, 

4.  ^  are  ye  now  perfected  in  the  flesh  ?     °Did  ye  suffer  so 

5.  many  things  in  vain?  °if  it  be  indeed  in  vain.     °He 

»  Or,  works  of  law      '  Or,  message      3  Or,  do  ye  now  make  an  end  in  the  flesh  ? 

a  votive  spectacle  of  Jesus  "in  his  blood."  Jn.  3  :  14  adds  a  com- 
parison to  the  brazen  serpent  (Num.  21  :  8,  9).  Here  the  reference 
is  to  Paul's  own  preaching,  which  made  the  cross  central  (i  Cor. 
2:2).     See  Appended  Note  C. 

2.  This  only.  Paul  knows  that  he  can  "  rest  his  case"  on  this  single 
issue.  He  had  done  so  with  complete  success  at  Jerusalem  (2:9; 
Acts  15  :  8,  12;  cf.  10  :  44-47;  11  :  15-18).  There  was  no  escape 
from  it;  for  the  mother  church  itself  dated  its  own  foundation  from 
the  same  phenomenon.  The  fundamental  confession  which  made 
Christianity  a  religion  was:  "Jesus  is  Lord."  It  rested  upon  this 
experience  as  its  proof  (Acts  2  :  33;  Eph.  4  :  7-10).  Jewish  messi- 
anism  anticipated  the  "outpouring  of  the  Spirit"  in  the  last  days  as 
the  token  of  the  Redeemer's  advent.  For  legalists  this  was  the  spirit 
of  obedience  to  the  law;  for  the  'Wisdom'  writers  the  spirit  of  'wis- 
dom,' for  apocalyptists  the  spirit  of  'prophecy'  (Joel  2  :  28-32;  cf. 
Num.  II  :  29).  The  appearance  of  these  "gifts  of  the  Spirit"  upon 
"faith  in  Christ  Jesus,"  including  the  "signs  and  wonders"  (Joel  2  :  30), 
was  the  proof  on  which  the  Church  itself  rested  its  assurance  that 
"God  hath  made  this  Jesus  .  .  .  both  Lord  and  Christ."  If  the 
Gentiles  also  had  had  "the  gifts  of  the  Spirit"  there  was  no  more  to  be 
said.  The  only  point  to  be  made  clear  was  when  the  gifts  came,  i.e., 
not  upon  this  attempt  to  supplement  by  works  of  the  law  their  justi- 
fication in  grace,  but  before  it,  at  the  time  of  their  hearing  (productive) 
of  faith. 

3-4.  Paul  digresses  to  a  brief  reductio  ad  absurdum:  This  is  a  kind 
of  progress  which  starts  from  the  higher  and  proceeds  to  the  lower; 
from  the  strong  and  eternal  to  the  weak  and  ephemeral.  God's 
method  is  the  reverse  (i  Cor.  15  :  46). 

-  4.  Did  ye  suffer.  In  biblical  use  the  verb  has  invariably  the  con- 
notation of  evil ;  not  merely  "  did  ye  experience?"  Of  the  churches 
of  South  Galatia  (not  of  Galatia  proper)  we  know  that  they  had  "en- 
dured a  great  fight  of  afiliction"  (Acts  13  :  50-51;  14  :  2,  5,  19,  22; 
2  Tim.  3  :  11). 

If  it  be  indeed  "in  vain."  Paul  qualifies  his  strong  expression, 
which  would  imply  a  greater  hopelessness  than  he  really  feels  in 
their  case;   c/".  4  :  11. 

74 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS  3  : 7 

therefore  that  supplieth  to  you  the  Spirit,  and  °worketh 
^  miracles  ^  among  you,  doeth  he  it  by  ^  the  works  of  the 
law,  or  by  the  *■  hearing  of  faith  ? 

6.  Even  as  Abraham  believed  God,  and  it  was  reckoned    Gen.  15 : 6 

7.  unto   him   for   righteousness.     ^Know   therefore   that 

»  Gr.  powers.       '  Or,  in       3  Or,  works  of  law        *  Or,  message       s  Or,  Ye  perceive 

5.  He  therefore,  etc.  A  return  to  the  point  laid  down  in  ver.  2. 
The  "therefore"  is  resumptive,  "Well,  then,  to  return."  We  learn 
now  more  specifically  what  Paul  meant  by  "Received  ye  the  Spirit?" 

Worketh  miracles  among  you  (better  "worketh  miraculous  power 
in  you";  see  alternative  rendering).  The  starting-point  of  the  New 
Testament  argument  from  "miracles"  is  not  with  those  wrought  by 
Jesus,  but  those  of  the  writers'  own  time.  They  have  "the  gift  of 
miracles,"  and  account  for  it  by  the  working  of  God  who  "supplies 
the  Spirit"  in  response  to  faith.  Jesus'  miracles  had  been  similar. 
Paul,  who  but  rarely  refers  to  miracles  of  his  own  (2  Cor.  12  :  12), 
never  refers  to  any  wrought  by  Jesus.  "Miracle"  has  not  disap- 
peared from  modern  experience  of  the  Spirit  except  as  a  matter  of 
interpretation.  The  phenomena  have  not  ceased  ;  but  our  idea  of 
their  causation  has  changed  in  accordance  with  the  modern  concep- 
tion of  "natural  law"  as  the  mode  of  the  divine  operation.  That 
which  to  the  modern  is  accountable  by  natural  causation,  including 
under  this  head  the  tendency  of  report  to  exaggerate,  to  the  ancient 
was  accountable  only  as  the  interposition  of  a  superhuman  being 
(divine,  angelic,  or  demonic).  Our  definition  of  the  New  Testament 
term  "miracle"  must  therefore  be:  A  surprising  occurrence  «*«ter- 
preted  as  due  to  the  intervention  of  a  personal  superhuman  being, 
in  response  to  human  appeal,  athwart  the  observed  course  of 
nature.  As  thus  interpreted  the  restoration  to  consciousness  of 
Eutychus,  after  a  fall  "from  the  third  story"  (Acts  20  :  7-12),  is  a 
"miracle."  It  was  such  to  Luke,  and  possibly  may  have  been  to 
Paul,  though  to  the  modern  it  may  be  only  a  more  or  less  surprising 
and  providential  occurrence.  But  of  the  conviction  of  Paul  that  the 
surprising  phenomena  of  "tongues,"  "healings,"  "helps,"  and 
"miracles,"  which  were  often  found  to  accompany  acceptance  of  the 
new  "faith,"  were  in  the  strictest  sense  "supernatural,"  there  cannot 
be  the  slightest  question.  The  only  surprising  thing  about  this  con- 
viction is  its  sobriety.  For  Paul's  ethical  sense  leads  him  to  insist 
on  the  subordination  of  all  such  mere  external  "manifestations  of  the 
Spirit,"  as  destined  to  "cease"  and  be  "done  away"  before  the  deeper 
and  more  abiding  gifts  (i  Cor.  c.  13). 

7S 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 


they  which  be  of  faith,  °the  same  are  sons  of  Abraham. 

8.  And  °the  scripture,  foreseeing  that  God  ^  would  justify 
the  ^Gentiles  by  faith,   preached    the  gospel  before- 

■3^  hand   unto  Abraham,  saying,   °In  thee  shall  all  the 

9.  nations  be  blessed.    So  then  they  which  be  of  faith  °are 
blessed  with  the  faithful  Abraham. 


Gr.  justifieth.         '  Gr.  nations. 


(i)  The  Ahrahamic  promise  universal,  and  based  on  faith,  3  :  6-9. 

The  very  man  through  whom  the  Jews  claim  to  be  "heirs  of  the 
world"  was  given  this  distinction  by  God  (Rom.  4  :  13)  on  the  ground 
not  of  works  of  the  law  (for  his  circumcision  came  afterward,  Rom. 
4  :  10),  but  of  faith  alone,  ver.  6-9. 

6.  The  remarkable  statement  of  Gen.  15  :  6  (J,  E),  preceding  Gen. 
17  :  10-14  (P),  gives  Paul  a  redoubtable  argument  against  the  Juda- 
izers,  which  he  develops  at  much  greater  length  in  Rom.  c.  4. 

7.  The  same.  Strongly  emphatic.  "It  is  these  (not  the  literal 
descendants)  who  are,"  etc.  The  point  at  issue  is  that  of  Philo's 
celebrated  treatise  {ca.  30  a.d.),  "Who  is  the  Heir  of  the  Things  of 
God?"  According  to  the  Judaizers,  those  who  become  "sons  of 
Abraham"  by  entering  into  the  covenant  of  adoption  prescribed  in 
Gen.  17  :  10-14,  a-n  implied  assumption  of  the  "yoke  of  the  law." 
According  to  Paul  those  who  by  Abraham's  faith  become  the  sons  of 
God,  and  thus  also  his  "heirs."     See  theQ.  E.  D.  in  4  :  7. 

8.  The  scripture  .  .  .  preached  the  gospel  beforehand.  Paul  shares 
the  rabbinic  theory  of  his  time  of  a  mysterious  meaning  miracu- 
lously embodied  in  "scripture"  without  the  knowledge  of  the  writers 
themselves  (i  Pt.  i  :  11 ;  i  Cor.  9  :  9-10).  It  is  further  developed  in 
ver.  16  and  4  :  21-31.  It  does  not  proceed,  however,  to  the  extent 
denounced  in  Jn.  5  :  37-40,  nor  to  the  extravagances  of  post-apos- 
tolic allegorical  exegesis. 

In  thee  shall  all  the  nations  be  blessed.  In  the  Hebrew  original  at 
first  only  a  magnification  of  the  greatness  of  Abraham's  endowment. 
The  surrounding  peoples  will  say,  "  God  bless  us,  as  he  has  done  with 
Abraham,"  using  his  name  proverbially  in  blessing  (see  alternate 
rendering  to  Gen.  22  :  18  and  cf.  48  :  20).  The  more  generous  in- 
terpretation that  the  Gentiles  shall  not  merely  invoke,  but  receive, 
blessing  through  Abraham  is  applicable  in  later  prophecy,  especially 
Deutero-Isaiah.  To  Paul  the  passage  is  "  prophetic "  of  Gentile 
redemption  by  the  same  means  as  Abraham,  i.e.,  faith. 

9.  Are  blessed.  Declared,  or  treated,  as  blessed  in  company  with 
Abraham.     Further  elaboration  of  the  thought  in  ver.  16,  28-29. 

76 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


10.  For  as  many  as  are  of  ^  the  works  of  the  law  are  under 

a  curse:  for  it  is  written,  Cursed  is  every  one  which   1^.27:26 
continueth  not  in  all  things  that  are  written  in  the  book 

11.  of  the  law,  to  do  them.     Now  that  no  man  is  justified 

^  by  the  law  in  the  sight  of  God,  is  evident :   for,  The  Hab.  2 : 4 

12.  righteous  shall  live  by  faith;    and  the  law  is  not  of  Lev.  18:5 
faith;  but,  He  that  doeth  them  shall  live  in  them. 


Or,  works  of  law       '  Gr.  in 


(2)  The  law  brings  not  blessing,  but  curse,  3  :  10-12. 

10.  Paul  takes  a  world-wide  view  of  redemption.  Its  historic 
stages  to  his  mind  are  three  only:  (i)  Adam,  in  consequence  of  whose 
fault  the  birthright  of  humanity  to  dominion  (Gen.  i  :  26)  and  eternal 
life  (Gen.  6  :  3  ;  c/".  Wisdom  of  Sol.  2  :  23)  was  lost ;  (2)  Abraham, 
in  consequence  of  whose  faith  it  was  conditionally  restored ;  (3) 
Christ,  through  whose  victory  and  gift  of  the  Spirit  believers  enter 
upon  the  inheritance.  The  Mosaic  dispensation  of  law  was  a  tem- 
porary expedient  adapted  to  special  requirements;  it  merely  "came 
in  alongside"  (Rom.  5  :  20;  cf.  ver.  19-22  below).  To  prove  that 
the  law  is  not  a  superior  prerogative  of  the  "holy  seed"  enabling  them 
as  "sons"  who  know  and  "do  the  will"  of  the  Creator  to  secure  the 
"inheritance"  to  the  exclusion  of  others,  Paul  advances  the  startling 
paradox  that  the  law  results  always  and  only  in  "curse,"  and  was  so 
intended!     See   Appended  Note  C. 

11.  By  stressing  the  word  "a^/"  in  his  quotation  from  the  law  (Dt. 
27  :  26)  Paul  had  given  to  the  Old  Testament  requirement  a  severity 
and  strictness  his  opponents  were  far  from  conceding  {cf.  5:3;  6  :  13). 
The  only  way,  after  this,  to  give  his  contention  verisimilitude  was  to 
point  out  the  "way  of  escape,"  as  having  been  intimated  even  before 
the  coming  of  Christ.  This  intimation  Paul  finds  not  only  in  the  gos- 
pel of  faith  "preached  beforehand  to  Abraham,"  but  in  the  prophets, 
notably  the  passage  from  Hab.  2  :  4.  "His  soul  (the  wicked  man's) 
is  puflfed  up,  it  is  not  upright  in  him ;  but  the  just  shall  live  by  his 
faith"  (alternative  rendering  "in  his  faithfulness").  The  exegesis  is 
manifestly  forced,  but  the  antithesis  seemed  to  Paul  to  contrast  the 
"boasting"  of  the  Jew  (Rom.  3  :  27;  4  :  2),  the  spirit  of  Pharisaic 
self -righteousness,  with  the  "righteousness  of  God"  preached  by 
Jesus. 

12.  Lev.  18  :  5  is  quoted  (appropriately)  as  exhibiting  the  spirit 
of  Mosaism  in  contrast  with  the  evangelic.  Again  the  word  "doeth" 
must  be  taken  in  an  extreme  sense,  to  reach  the  conclusion  aimed  at 
(ver.  21).    The  law  brings  only  death,  never  life. 

77 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


13.  Christ  redeemed  us  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  having 
become  a  curse  for  us:    for  it  is  written,  Cursed  is 

14.  every  one  that  hangeth  on  a  tree:  that  upon  the  Gen- 
tiles might  come  the  blessing  of  Abraham  in  Christ 
Jesus ;  that  we  might  receive  °the  promise  of  the  Spirit 
through  faith. 

(3)  Redemption  from  the  curse  of  the  Law  explains  the  Cross,  ver, 

13-14- 

13.  Paul  delights  in  paradox.  His  opponents  having  taken  their 
stand  on  the  blessing  given  to  Abraham  as  conditioned  on  obedience 
to  the  law,  he  aims  to  show  that  it  is  precisely  in  the  removal  of  this 
alleged  condition  that  the  messianic  blessing  consists.  For  the  death 
of  Christ,  already  referred  to  as  the  divine  provocative  of  faith  (see 
on  I  :  4;  2  :  19-21  and  Appended  Note  C),  was  in  its  very  manner 
defiant  of  the  law  and  thus  indicative  of  the  liberation  intended.  Not 
only  did  Jesus  incur  death  as  the  champion  of  "sinners,"  but  the 
very  mode  of  his  martyrdom  was  a  form  of  death,  and  the  only  one, 
which  the  law  pronounces  "accursed"  (Dt.  21  :  23). 

14.  The  Q.  E.  D.  of  arguments  (i)  and  (2).  Christ's  death,  and 
more  particularly  the  special  form  of  his  death,  proves  that  the  prom- 
ise to  Abraham  was  not  nationalistic  in  application  but  universal, 
and  that  obedience  to  the  law  is  not  the  condition  of  inheriting  it,  but 
rather  relinquishment  of  Pharisaic  self-righteousness,  in  filial  "faith." 

The  promise  of  the  Spirit.  I.e.,  the  promise  whose  content  is  the 
Spirit.  See  on  ver.  2  and  below  on  ver.  21.  Originally  the  promise 
had  been  "this  land"  (Gen.  15  :  7-21).  The  decline  of  national 
hopes  had  led  to  a  gradual  spiritualization  and  universalization  of 
this  outlook  {cf.  Heb.  11  :  8-10,  13-15;  Acts  7  :  5).  "Prophecy," 
after  Israel's  national  existence  had  been  merged  in  that  of  great 
world  empires,  became  "apocalypse,"  which  deals  with  cosmic  re- 
adjustments. "Wisdom,"  equally  universalistic,  bases  hope  for  the 
world  on  anthropological  and  sociological  transformation.  This 
involves  a  "spiritualizing"  interpretation  of  "the  promise"  for  which 
the  minds  of  devout  Israelites  were  amply  prepared,  especially  in  the 
Dispersion,  and  most  of  all  at  Alexandria.  Cf.  the  spiritualization 
in  Acts  7  :  2-16.  With  Paul  the  promise  is  simply  "sonship,"  which 
involves  "heirship"  over  God's  creation,  and  "life."  These  all  result 
from  the  outpouring  of  the  Spirit  of  adoption  (4  :  5-7 ;  Rom.  8  :  15-17). 

(4)  Impossibility  of  the  law  having  been  meant  as  a  condition  of  the 
promise,  and  of  distinctions  of  race  among  the  heirs,  3  :  15-29. 

Statement  of  Principles  :  (a)  Covenants  do  not  admit  of  subse- 
quent alteration  of  the  terms,  (b)  The  promise  in  question  was  put 
in  a  form  adapted  to  universal,  not  particularistic  application,  3  :  15-16. 

78 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


15.  Brethren,  I  speak  after  the  manner  of  men:  Though 
it  be  but  °a  man's  ^  covenant,  yet  when  it  hath  been 
confirmed,  no  one  maketh  it  void,  or  addeth  thereto. 

16.  Now  to  Abraham  were  the  promises  spoken,  °and  to 

his  seed.    He  saith  not,  And  to  seeds,  as  of  many;  Gen.  12:7; 
but  as  of  one.  And  to  thy  seed,  which  is  Christ.  17^7;' 

17.  °Now  this  I  say;   A  ^  covenant  confirmed  beforehand         24:7  ' 
by  God,  the  law,  which  came  °four  hundred  and  thirty   Ex.  12 :  40 


Or,  testament 


15.  The  Abrahamic  promise  was  a  formal  "covenant"  (Gen. 
15  :  8-18).  Subsequent  imposition  of  conditions  in  such  cases  are 
regarded  as  dishonorable  even  for  a  man  (Ps.  15  :  4). 

16.  And  to  his  seed.  The  Judaizers  propose  to  exclude  the  younger 
son  (cf.  4  :  22-28)  from  a  share  in  the  inheritance  (4  :  17),  by  treating 
the  law  as  its  condition.  Paul  argues  (by  a  piece  of  rabbinic  sub- 
tlety issuing  in  ver.  28)  that  if  this  had  been  the  intention  the  cove- 
nant in  its  language  would  have  employed  a  plural,  "seeds,"  and  not 
the  singular,  "seed,"  because  admittedly  (?)  the  Gentiles  have  some 
part  in  it  (ver.  8),  and  if  any  distinction  of  race  be  made  among  the 
heirs  a  plural  would  be  necessary  rather  than  a  collective.  The  sin- 
gular therefore  has  a  subtle,  deep  significance.  It  must  be  understood 
in  a  sense  comprehensive  of  all ;  and  this  can  be  the  case  only  when 
we  think  of  it  as  referring  to  Christ,  who  like  a  "second  Adam"  is 
"the  head  of  every  man"  (i  Cor.  11:3;  Eph.  i  :  22;  4  :  15;  Col. 
I  :  18;  i  :  19).  In  reality  the  Hebrew  collective  term  "seed"  is  used 
precisely  as  the  English  would  be.  The  argument  has  no  force  unless 
we  admit  —  as  was  admitted  in  Paul's  time  —  that  meanings  may  be 
validly  drawn  from  Scripture  which  were  not  intended  or  realized  by 
the  writer. 

17.  Now  this  I  say.  Better,  "This  is  what  I  mean."  So  4  :  i. 
Having  stated  (ver.  15,  16)  his  two  propositions:  (i)  the  law  not  a 
condition  ;  (2)  the  heirs  not  plural,  Paul  now  proceeds  to  develop 
them  in  ver.  17-24  and  25-29  respectively. 

For  what  purpose  the  law  was  really  given,  (a)  not  as  a  condition 
limiting  the  promise,  3  :  17-18. 

17.  Four  hundred  and  thirty  years  after.  The  number  430  is 
taken  from  Ex.  12  :  40,  41,  but  does  not  include  the  lives  of  Isaac  and 
Jacob.  In  Gen.  15  :  13,  the  passage  here  interpreted,  the  coming 
into  the  inheritance  is  reckoned  as  occurring  roundly  400  years  after. 
There  is  confusion  which  resulted  in  two  different  reckonings  current 
in  Paul's  time,  but  it  is  immaterial  to  Paul's  argument, 

79 


i8  EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 

years  after,  doth  not  disannul,  so  as  to  make  the  prom- 
i8.   ise  of   none  effect.     For  if   the  inheritance  is  of   the 

law,  it  is  no  more  of  promise:  but  God  hath  granted 
19.   it  to  Abraham  by  promise.     °What  then  is  the  law? 

°It  was  added  because  of  transgressions,  till  the  seed 

should  come  to  whom  the  promise  hath  been  made; 

and  it  was  °ordained  through  angels  °by  the  hand  of  a 

18.  Emphasis  laid  on  the  evangelic  nature  of  the  "gospel"  preached 
beforehand  to  Abraham.  The  "covenant"  was  an  act  of  "grace," 
not  "disannulled"  by  subsequent  imposition  of  conditions. 

(/S)  The  Law  was  really  meant  for  a  discipline  to  develop  the  heir, 

3  '•  19-24. 

19.  What  then  is  the  law?  Paul  may  well  interject  this  question 
of  amazement  and  incredulity  in  the  mouth  of  his  opponents;  for 
the  paradox  he  is  about  to  propound  is  the  most  startling  a  Jew  could 
well  conceive. 

It  was  added  because  of  (Or.  "for  the  sake  of")  transgressions.  The 
English  versions  by  no  means  do  justice  to  the  startling  force  of  the 
Greek  preposition,  which  implies  nothing  less  than  that  it  was  the 
intended  purpose  of  the  law  to  produce  transgressions.  In  what 
sense  Paul  could  employ  this  paradoxical  statement  becomes  ap- 
parent from  the  parallel  in  Rom.  5  :  13-20.  The  function  of  law 
in  Paul's  philosophy  of  redemption  is  explained  more  fully  in  Ap- 
pended Note  C.  As  conscious  and  painful  and  involving  "curse" 
the  condition  of  a  conscious  "transgressor"  to  which  man  is  brought 
by  the  incoming  of  law  is  an  advance  upon  the  mere  state  of  innocency 
in  that  it  paves  the  way  for  blessing. 

Ordained  through  angels.  In  two  further  respects  the  law  shows 
its  merely  incidental,  temporary,  and  provisional  character.  Both 
parties  were  indirectly  represented,  instead  of  acting  in  person  as  in 
the  original  covenant  (Gen.  15  :  17,  18;  cf.  Ex.  20  :  18-21 ;  24  :  3-8). 
The  giving  of  the  law  "through  angels"  is  a  belief  resting  upon  cur- 
rent interpretations  of  Dt.  t,t,  :  2,  which  in  combination  with  Ps. 
68  :  II  was  taken  to  identify  the  phenomena  described  in  Ex.  19  :  18, 
19;  20  :  18  as  appearances  of  angels  {cf-  Ps.  104  :  4;  Heb.  1:7). 
To  Luke  (Acts  7  :  38,  53),  as  to  Josephus  (Antiq.  XV,  v.  3)  and  the 
Jews  generally,  this  only  enhances  the  authority  of  the  law.  To 
Paul  and  his  disciple,  the  writer  of  Hebrews  (Heb.  i  :  2,  7-8,  13- 
14;  2:2,  3),  it  is  a  mark  of  inferiority.  Israel  is  no  more 
under  the  direct  leadership  of  God  than  the  other  nations,  whom 
God  was  believed  to  have  committed  each  to  the  guardianship  of 
its  own  "angel"  (Dan.  10:  13,  21;  12  :  i).     Angelic  guidance  was 

ao 


EPISTLE   TO   THE   GALATIANS 


20.  mediator.     Now  a  mediator  is  not  a  mediator  of  one; 

2 1 .  but  God  is  one.     Is  the  law  then  against  the  promises  of 

held  to  have  been  substituted  for  God's  personal  presence  as  a 
punishment  for  Israel's  "stifif-neckedness"  in  the  wilderness  (Ex. 
23  :  20-23;  ZZ  '•  2-4;  cf'  Acts  7  :  41-43).  The  standing  reproach 
of  Judaism  on  the  part  of  Christians  of  the  second  century  is  in  fact 
that  it  is  a  "worship  of  angels."     See  on  4  :  3,  8-9. 

By  (Gr.  "in")  the  hand  of  a  mediator.  Moses'  function  in  "medi- 
ating" for  the  people  with  God,  plays  a  great  part  in  the  Old 
Testament  representation  (Ex.  20  :  19;  Dt.  5  :  19-25,  18  :  16), 
in  contemporary  Jewish  Uterature  (Philo,  Vita  Mosis,  iii.  20; 
cf.  Assumptio  Mosis  (ca.  40  A.D.)  i.  14),  and  in  Pauline  (2  Cor. 
3  :  7-4  :  6)  and  Deutero-Pauline  writings  of  the  New  Testament 
(i  Tim.  2:5;  Heb.  8:6;  9  :  15;  12  :  24).  He  alone  beheld  "the 
glory  of  God"  (Ex.  ^^  :  17-23;  34  :  5-8),  the  people  refused  to 
draw  nigh  (20  :  18-19),  ^.nd  could  not  endure  to  see  even  the 
reflection  of  the  "glory"  from  Moses'  face  (34  :  29-35).  ^^  ^ 
Cor.  3  :  7-4  :  6  Paul  develops  most  poetically  the  contrast  here 
merely  suggested  between  the  mediation  of  Moses  and  that  of  Christ. 
Ministers  of  the  new  covenant,  though  its  "glory"  far  exceeds  that 
of  the  "ministration  of  death"  and  "condemnation,"  are  "not  as 
Moses,  who  put  a  veil  upon  his  face  that  the  children  of  Israel  might 
not  look  steadfastly.  .  .  .  We  (ministers  of  the  better  covenant) 
with  unveiled  face  reflect  as  mirrors  the  glory  of  the  Lord  (Jesus), 
being  transfigured  into  the  same  likeness."  For  "God  that  said  (at 
the  first  creation)  Light  shall  shine  out  of  darkness,  shined  (in  the  new 
creation)  in  our  hearts  to  give  the  light  of  the  knowledge  of  '  the  glory 
of  God'  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ "  (cf.  Jn.  14  :  9). 

20.  A  verse  of  extreme  diflSculty,  for  which  Lightfoot  counts  "  250 
or  300"  interpretations.  The  difficulty  lies  in  the  introduction  of  a 
new  thought  —  the  unity  of  God  —  not  germane  to  the  context,  but 
in  the  judgment  of  some  patristic  interpreters  intended  to  contrast 
the  new  covenant  of  Christianity  as  from  the  one  God,  with  Judaism 
as  from  a  multiplicity  of  angels.  God  required  no  go-between  for 
his  revelation  (Christianity),  because  he  "  is  one."  That  of  the  angels 
(Mosaism)  required  a  "mediator,"  for  they  are  many.  If  this  be 
the  intended  sense  the  verse  may  be  set  down,  even  without  manu- 
script evidence,  as  spurious;  for  however  admirably  this  idea  of 
Christianity  mediated  by  God  in  person  vs.  Judaism  as  a  "  worship  of 
angels"  comports  with  second  century  patristic  thought  (see  on  4  :  10), 
it  is  certain  from  the  New  Testament  parallels  cited  (preceding  note) 
that  Moses  is  brought  forward  by  Paul  as  appearing  in  behalf  not 
of  the  angels,  but  of  the  people.  If  the  verse  be  authentic,  we  can  only 
hesitate  between  two  general  forms  of  interpretation,  each  open  to 
Q  81 


22  EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 

God?  God  forbid:    °for  if  there  had  been  a  law  given 

which   could  make   alive,   verily  righteousness  would 

22.   have  been  of  the  law.     Howbeit  the  scripture  °hath 


serious  objection,  a  (Lightfoot):  Mediatorship  implies  a  condi- 
tional relationship.  Promise,  as  in  the  case  of  Abraham  and  Christ, 
"depends  on  the  sole  decree  of  God."  Hut  the  former  statement  is 
hardly  valid  and  the  latter  is  in  conflict  with  Paulinism  (i  Tim. 
2:5;  Heb.  8:6;  9  :  15;  12  :  24).  The  whole  could  be  far  more 
simply  expressed  had  Paul  so  intended,  h  (Zahn):  Mediatorship 
implies  a  plurality  in  interest,  "God  is  one,"  therefore  the  plurality 
must  be  on  the  other  side,  that  of  the  heirs ;  but  in  the  dispensa- 
tion of  grace  the  heir  is  one  (ver.  16,.  28).  This  accords  better  with 
the  context,  but  would  at  least  require  us  to  read  "  But  Christ  is  one," 
instead  of  the  unnecessary  truism  "But  God  is  one."  The  sense 
becomes  clearest  by  simple  omission  of  the  verse. 

21.  The  natural  objection  of  the  Judaizer  to  Paul's  doctrine  of 
"death"  and  "condemnation"  as  the  object  of  the  "ministration  of 
Moses"  is  that  it  sets  the  two  revelations  of  God  in  conflict  with  one 
another,  an  inference  drawn  in  good  faith  by  Marcion,  the  great 
Paulinist  of  the  second  century.  Paul  answers  with  an  attempt  to 
make  good  his  extraordinary  paradox  that  the  object  of  the  law  was 
not  to  give  life.  For  if  there  had  been  a  law  given  which  could  {i.e., 
such  that  it  could)  make  alive.  This  is  undermining  the  very  centre 
of  his  opponents'  position,  the  point  in  their  view  least  in  need  of 
defence.  It  is  in  fact  the  explicit  statement  of  the  law  that  it  is  given 
to  "make  alive"  (Dt.  30  :  15-20),  and  this  is  the  very  foundation 
principle  of  current  Jewish  orthodoxy  (Mt.  19  :  16-19;  2  Esdras 
14  :  30).  We  cannot  wonder  that  Paul's  arguments  to  disprove  this 
provoked  from  his  antagonists  the  accusation  of  "  handling  the  word 
of  God  deceitfully"  (2  Cor.  4:2).  Only  Paul's  unyielding  devotion 
to  the  faith  of  his  childhood  in  the  superhuman  sanctity  of  the  law 
(Rom.  7:12)  can  explain  his  resort  to  an  interpretation  so  violent. 
The  current  assumption  of  his  time,  of  a  sense  in  Scripture  tran- 
scending that  intended  by  its  writers,  could  give  momentary  plausi- 
bility to  such  interpretations. 

22.  A  falling  back  upon  the  passages  quoted  in  ver.  lo-ii.  The 
real  basis  is  broader.  Paul  expresses  it  by  a  word  unknown  to  He- 
brew literature,  but  vital  to  his  system,  a  coinage  of  the  Stoics, 
"conscience"  (Rom.  2  :  15).  Hath  shut  up  all  things.  Not  merely 
men  and  angels  (i  Cor.  6:3),  but  even  the  impersonal  creation, 
which  now  awaits  with  groaning  the  "incorruption"  to  be  restored 
to  it  when  the  sons  of  God  are  manifested  (Rom.  8  :  19-21). 

83 


EPISTLE  TO   THE  GALATIANS 


shut  up  all  things  under  sin,  that  °the  promise  by  faith 
in  Jesus  Christ  might  be  given  to  them  that  believe. 

23.  But  before  ^  faith  came,  we  were  °kept  in  ward  under 
the  law,  shut  up  unto  °the  faith  which  should  afterwards 

24.  be  revealed.     So  that  the  law  hath  been  °our  tutor  to 
bring  us  unto  Christ,  that  we  might  be  justified  by  faith. 

25.  But  now  that  faith  is  come,  °we  are  no  longer  under  a 

26.  tutor.     For  °ye  are  all  sohs  of  God,  through  faith,  °in 

27.  Christ  Jesus.     °For  as  many  of  you  as  were  baptized 

'  Or,  the  faith 

The  promise  —  of  Gen.  15  :  7,  here  interpreted  as  =  "life"  (ver. 
21).     See  note  on  ver.  14. 

23-24.  Conclusion  of  Paul's  answer  to  the  objection,  "What  then 
is  the  law?"  (ver.  19). 

Kept  in  ward  .  .  .  our  tutor.  The  two  comparisons  do  not  pre- 
sent different  aspects  of  the  law  (restraint,  instruction)  but  the  same, 
viz,  the  discipline  of  restraint  and  prohibition.  The  "tutor"  {pada- 
gogus)  in  ancient  use  was  not  an  instructor,  but  merely  a  slave  re- 
sponsible for  the  child's  safety  and  good  conduct.  The  words  "to 
bring  us"  supplied  in  R.  V.  import  somewhat  more  than  the  sense 
warrants.  Paul  is  not  concerned  here  with  the  light  given  by  the 
law,  but  with  its  curse  and  bondage.  Until  we  were  brought  "unto 
Christ "  it  was  jailer  and  mentor. 

Faith  ...  the  faith.  The  spirit  of  filial  trust  evoked  by  the  spec- 
tacle of  the  cross;    see  on  i  :  23;  2  :  16. 

(b)  Impossibility  of  distinctions  between  the  heirs.  The  sonship  is  a 
common  life,  3  :  25-29. 

25-26.  We  ...  ye  all.  The  change  of  person  indicates  the  tran- 
sition from  consideration  of  the  Jewish  believer  (as  in  2  :  15-16)  to 
the  Gentile.  For  all  alike  faith  results  in  the  same  gift  of  "  the  Spirit " 
(ver.  2)  giving  assurance  of  sonship  with  all  the  heirship  therein  im- 
plied (4  :  6;   cf  Rom.  8  :  15-17  and  see  note  below). 

In  Christ  Jesus.  On  the  mystical  sense  of  this  phrase  of  Pauline 
coinage  see  above  (note  on  2  :  4)  and  the  notes  here  following. 

27.  For.  Ver.  27-28  explain  the  clause  "in  Christ  Jesus"  ap- 
pended "so  as  to  form  in  a  manner  a  distinct  proposition"  (Light- 
foot)  at  the  end  of  ver.  26. 

Baptism,  which  all  alike  have  undergone,  by  its  very  symbolism  of 
immersion,  and  its  accompaniment  of  gifts  of  the  Spirit,  is  the  proof 
of  this  unity  "in  Christ."    The  thought  is  more  fully  developed  in 

83 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


28.  into  Christ  did  put  on  Christ.  There  can  be  neither 
Jew  nor  Greek,  there  can  be  neither  bond  nor  free, 
there  can  be  no  male  and  female:   for  ye  °all  are  one 

Rom.  6  :  3-1 1,  where  the  fundamental  significance  of  the  rite  as 
viewed  by  Paul  is  made  apparent.  Paul's  ruling  principle  is  that  for 
redemption  a  new  infusion  of  "spirit"  is  indispensable  to  emancipate 
flesh  from  the  dominion  of  sin,  and  this  divine  operation  of  grace  is 
absolutely  conditioned  upon  the  renunciation  of  all  attempts  at  self- 
justification  in  a  spirit  of  filial  trust.  In  accordance  with  this  princi- 
ple baptism  symbolizes  for  Paul  always  death  and  resurrection.  The 
elements  of  this  change  are  the  cessation  of  life  conceived  as  a  self- 
centred  activity,  and  the  beginning  of  eternal  life,  which  is  "hid 
with  Christ  in  God,"  and  this  not  one's  own,  either  in  derivation  or 
direction  (2  :  20;  2  Cor.  5  :  15;  Col.  2  :  12,  20;  3  :  i;  Phil.  2  :  13; 
Rom.  12  :  2).  The  most  essential  "teaching  of  baptisms,"  therefore,  is 
"  repentance /row  dead  works  and  faith  toward  God"  (Heb.  6  :  1-2), 
since  by  this  means  we  "put  on  Christ"  (Eph.  4  :  23;  Col.  3  :  9-1 1), 
whose  all-surrounding,  all-pervading  Spirit  is  a  "  Red  Sea"  of  grace  in 
which  all  believers  are  baptized  into  mystic  union  with  Christ,  as  the 
fathers  "were  baptized  unto  Moses  in  the  cloud  and  the  sea"  (i  Cor. 
10  :  2). 

28.  The  Jewish  prayer-book  still  contains  a  thanksgiving  corre- 
sponding to  that  of  the  ancient  Greek  for  not  having  been  born  a  bar- 
barian or  a  slave. 

I  thank  thee  that  I  was  not  born  a  Gentile. 

I  thank  thee  that  I  was  not  born  a  slave. 

I  thank  thee  that  I  was  not  born  a  woman. 
Such  distinctions  "in  Christ"  are  for  Paul  inadmissible.  They  are 
not  merely  wrong;  they  are  non-existent.  All  alike,  Jews  and  Gen- 
tiles, men  and  women,  have  renounced  and  terminated  their  life  "in 
the  flesh."  So  far  as  they  have  real  life  it  is  a  life  actually  and  really 
of  the  same  substance  with  the  life  of  Christ;  for  "spirit"  is  to  Paul 
something  far  more  real  than  mere  influence.  Christ  is  thus  in  a 
perfectly  concrete  sense  "the  head  of  every  man."  He  is  a  "second 
Adam"  in  whom  all  are  "made  alive,"  and  just  as  in  Jewish  specula- 
tion the  first  Adam  was  so  representative  of  the  common  humanity 
as  not  even  to  share  in  the  distinctions  of  sex,  so  in  the  "man  from 
heaven"  all  distinctions  of  mere  "flesh"  will  disappear. 

All  one  man.  The  conclusion  of  the  argument  that  the  "seed"  of 
Abraham  is  not  a  plurality,  ver.  16.  This  "one  new  man  "  whose  mem- 
bers are  pervaded  and  unified  by  the  life-giving  flow  of  the  Spirit,  is 
described  in  Eph.  4  :  13-16.  The  arterial  system,  which  at  death 
is  found  empty  of  blood,  was  supposed  in  antiquity  to  afford  circula- 
tion to  air  or  "animal  spirits." 

84 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


29.   man  in  Christ  Jesus.     And  °if  ye  are  Christ's,  then  are 
ye  Abraham's  seed,  heirs  according  to  promise. 

2.    The  Galatians  are  warned  that  their  present  apostasy  is 
a  return  to  bondage,  4  :  1-5  :  12. 

4.       °But  I  say  that  so  long  as  the  heir  is  a  child,  he 
differeth  nothing  from  a  bondservant,  though  he  is  °lord 

29.  If  ye  are  Christ's  (Gr.  "of  Christ").  We  might  render  "mem- 
bers" or  "parts  of  Christ."  The  unity  is  in  Paul's  view  an  actual 
participation  in  the  life  of  God  in  Christ.  This  mystical  conception, 
so  real  to  his  personal  experience,  justifies  to  his  mind  the  belief  that 
in  the  use  of  the  collective  singular  "seed"  instead  of  the  plural 
"seeds"  or  some  distributive  of  like  sense,  the  Scripture  was  made 
to  utter  a  mysterious  'prophecy'  of  Christ. 

General  Proposition.  In  its  very  nature  as  an  adoption  the  gift 
of  the  Spirit  is  an  emancipation  for  all  mankind,  4  :  1-7. 

I.  But  I  say,  or  "mean";  i.e.,  "My  proposition  is  this."  Having 
completed  in  3  :  6-29  his  proof  that  the  Abrahamic  inheritance  was 
intended  for  the  spiritual  "seed"  who  are  "one"  in  Christ,  Paul 
returns  to  his  original  postulate,  his  "only"  appeal,  3  :  2-5,  for  the 
purpose  of  determining  the  nature  of  the  "inheritance." 

Lord  of  all.  Contemporary  writings,  Jewish  and  Christian,  leave  no 
doubt  whatever  as  to  the  assumed  content  of  the  "inheritance." 
Abraham  was  understood  to  have  been  literally,  as  Paul  says,  "made 
heir  of  the  world"  (Rom.  4  :  13).  It  had  been  created  for  Adam 
(Gen.  I  :  28;  Ps.  8  :  5-7),  but  when  Adam  had  evinced  his  unfitness, 
Abraham  and  his  seed,  including  all  faithful  Israelites,  were  chosen  to 
the  exclusion  of  "sinners  of  the  Gentiles"  and  disloyal  Jews.  "Es- 
dras"  (ca.  90  a.d.)  complains,  "O  Lord,  thou  hast  said  that  for  our 
sakes  thou  madest  this  world.  As  for  the  other  nations  which  also 
come  of  Adam,  thou  hast  said  (Is.  40  :  15)  that  they  are  nothing, 
and  are  like  unto  spittle.  .  .  .  And  now,  O  Lord,  behold  these  na- 
tions, which  are  reputed  as  nothing,  be  lords  over  us  and  devour  us. 
But  we,  thy  people  whom  thou  hast  called  (Ex.  4  :  24)  thy  first-born, 
thy  only  begotten,  .  .  .  are  given  into  their  hands.  If  the  world 
now  be  made  for  our  sakes  why  do  we  not  possess  for  an  inheritance 
our  world?"  Christian  expectations  are  not  less,  but  greater.  The 
"son"  must  "inherit  the  earth"  (Mt.  5:5;!  Cor.  3  :  22;  Rev.  21  :  i, 
7).  If  we  "see  not  yet  all  things  made  subject  unto  him,"  Christ's 
triumph  over  the  (demonic)  powers  which  now  control  the  world, 
including  "  him  that  hath  the  power  of  death"  proves  that  he  is  hence- 
forth expecting  until  his  (invisible)  enemies  be  made  subject  unto 

85 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


2.  of  all;   but  is  °under  guardians  and  stewards  until  °the 

3.  term  appointed  of  the  father.     So  we   also,  when  we 
were  children,  were  held  in  bondage  under  the  °^  rudi- 

'  Or,  elements 


him  (i  Cor.  15  :  27;  Heb.  2  :  8,  9).  The  object  of  creation  which 
the  Gentiles  vainly  inquire  after,  angels  are  ignorant  of,  and  which 
Jews  understand  to  have  been  their  national  benefit,  is  therefore 
revealed  in  the  Church  (Eph.  3  :  9-10),  which  takes  the  place  in 
patristic  thought  of  Israel  as  the  heir  of  God.  Its  conflict  accordingly 
is  "not  (like  Israel's),  against  flesh  and  blood,  but  against  the  prin- 
cipalities, against  the  world-rulers  of  this  darkness,  against  the  spirit- 
ual hosts  of  wickedness  in  the  heavenly  places"  (Eph.  6  :  12)  who 
now  struggle  to  prolong  the  dominion  they  have  abused  (i  Cor.  2:8), 
supplanting  and  subjecting  the  rightful  heir.  When  the  sons  of  God 
are  manifested  as  God's  adoptive  heirs,  the  creation,  delivered  from 
its  bondage  to  "vanity,"  will  gladly  revert  to  its  intended  owners, 
in  spite  of  all  that  "death  or  life,  angels  or  principalities,  height  or 
depth"  can  do  to  prevent  it  (Rom.  8  :  19-22,  38-39).  Thus  in  "the 
adoption"  will  be  made  manifest  "to  every  angel  and  spirit"  the 
hidden  purpose  of  the  Creator  (Eph.  3  :  9-1 1). 

2.  Under  guardians  (of  the  person)  and  stewards  (of  the  property). 
Angelic  "world- rulers"  appointed  to  the  guardianship  of  nations  and 
direction  of  the  cosmic  forces,  according  to  contemporary  Jewish 
belief.  The  judgment  of  the  angels  (i  Cor.  6  :  3)  for  their  malad- 
ministration of  this  trust  it  was  believed  would  precede  the  general 
judgment  of  mankind.     See  on  ver.  3. 

The  term  appointed.  Whether  Roman,  or  Greek,  or  (more  prob- 
ably) some  provincial  legal  practice  of  Galatia  underlies  Paul's 
figure  is  of  minor  importance.  Also  whether  the  father  is  conceived 
of  as  dead  or  not  (cf.  Heb.  9  :  16),  Unlike  certain  Jewish  liberals  of 
his  time  in  Alexandria,  who  considered  only  the  "spiritual"  sense 
of  the  law  to  be  binding,  Paul  interpreted  the  obligation  of  the  law 
as  literally  as  any  Palestinian  rabbi,  until  the  death  of  Christ. 

3.  Rudiments  (better  alternative  rendering  "elements,"  Gr.  stoi- 
cheia)  of  the  world.  The  sense  of  the  word  is  not  here  inanimate  simple 
rules,  as  in  Heb.  5  :  12,  but  animate  beings  "which  by  nature  are  no 
gods"  though  mistaken  for  such  (ver.  8),  and  which  as  "guardians 
and  stewards"  might  be  mistakenly  supposed  to  have  authority  and 
wealth  in  their  own  right  until  shown  by  the  manifestation  of  the 
"heir"  to  be  "weak  and  beggarly."  This  semi-personal  sense  is 
more  common  to  Jewish  and  patristic  writings  than  that  of  "rudi 
ments  of  learning,"  or  "stars,"  i.e.,  cosmic  beings  of  the  constella 

86 


EPISTLE  TO  THE  GALATIANS  4  :  6 

merits  of  the  world:  but  when  °the  fulness  of  the  time 
came,  God  sent  forth  his  Son,°born  of  a  woman,  °born 
under  the  law,  that  he  might  redeem  them  which  were 
under  the  law,  that  we  might  receive  the  adoption  of 
sons.  And  because  ye  are  sons,  God  sent  forth  the 
Spirit  of  his*  Son  into  our  hearts,  crying,  °Abba,  Father. 


tions,  the  latter  sense  being  nearer  to  the  present.  Here,  as  in  Col. 
2  :  8,  20  {cf.  the  adjoining  ver.  10,  15,  18),  Paul  means  "the  princi- 
palities and  powers,  the  world-rulers  of  this  darkness"  (Eph.  6  ;  12; 
I  Cor.  2  :  8). 

4.  In  this  semi-mythologic  context  it  is  obvious  that  Paul  is  not 
thinking  of  a  sending  from  Nazareth,  but  from  the  height  of  heaven 
{cf.  Rom.  10  :  6-8;  Eph.  4  :  8-10).  We  must  interpret  accordingly 
the  self-impoverishment  of  the  Son  in  2  Cor.  8  :  9,  and  the  "obedi- 
ence" of  Phil.  2  :  6-9.  It  is  a  cosmic  transaction  in  a  preexistent 
state.  It  should  be  needless  to  say  that  Paul  does  not  derive  this 
conception  of  the  career  of  Jesus  from  the  story  of  Peter,  but  from 
current  apocalyptic  ideas  of  the  world-redeemer,  interpreted  in  the 
light  of  his  own  "  visions  and  revelations  of  the  Lord."  Nevertheless 
he  takes  pains  to  emphasize  the  purely  human  conditions  under  which 
"the  Son"  appeared  {cf.  Heb.  2:  17;  4:  15);  otherwise  his  cosmic 
Christology  could  not  have  been  adjusted  to  the  simple  recollection  of 
the  Galilean  apostles.  The  fulness  of  the  time.  The  cosmic  economy 
of  the  Creator  is  conceived  under  the  images  of  the  redemption  of 
Israel  from  Egypt  as  in  Eph.  i  :  3-14.  The  release  of  the  "sons" 
cannot  occur  until  the  period  set  for  the  dominion  of  the  hostile 
powers,  as  in  Gen.  15  :  16.  Born  of  a  woman.  The  "weaker 
vessel."  The  expression  is  used  similarly  of  human  frailty  in  Job 
14  :  i;  Mt.  II  :  11,  and  elsewhere.  This  context,  where  the  effort 
is  to  show  the  completeness  of  Christ's  assumption  of  our  com- 
mon humanity  with  all  its  weaknesses,  should  be  the  last  to  set 
over  against  Rom.  i  :  3,  as  if  it  denied  the  human  fatherhood.  Born 
under  the  law.  The  reason  to  Paul's  mind  why  the  world-redeemer 
was  "made  a  minister  of  the  circumcision"  (Rom.  15  :  8)  was  that 
among  the  circumcision  the  opposition  between  the  "law  of  sin  in 
our  members"  and  the  "law  of  the  mind"  had  reached  its  acutest 
stage.  As  friend  and  Redeemer  of  "sinners"  he  must  go  where  the 
sense  of  sin  was  most  acute. 

6.  The  reasoning  is  from  the  phenomena  of  "tongues,"  the  most 
conspicuous  manifestation  of  the  gifts  of  the  Spirit  (i  Cor.  14  :  2-19, 
22).  Among  the  "strange"  {i.e.  foreign)  words  most  frequently 
heard  in  these  ecstatic  utterances  (i  Cor.  14  :  21)  was  the  Aramaic 

87 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 


7.  So  that  thou  art  no  longer  a  bondservant,  but  a  son; 
°and  if  a  son,  then  an  heir  through  God. 

8.  Howbeit  °at  that  time,  °not  knowing  God,  ye  were-°in 

9.  bondage  to  them  which  by  nature  are  no  gods:  but 
now  that  ye  have  come  to  know  God,  or  rather  to  be 
known  of  God,  how  turn  ye  back  again  to  the  °weak 

Abba  {i.e.,  Father),  which  the  evangelist  Mark  retains  in  the  original 
as  being  characteristic  of  Jesus  (Mk.  14  :  36).  The  fuller  parallel  to 
our  present  passage,  Rom.  8  :  23,  26,  27,  compares  these  "inarticu- 
late groanings"  of  the  Spirit  to  the  voiceless  cry  of  the  fettered  crea- 
tion. It  is  "the  Spirit  of  Adoption"  which  intercedes  with  God  for 
us,  in  sounds  of  which  men  catch  only  here  and  there  the  broken  "  cry," 
Abba,  Abba. 

7.  Return  to  3  :  2.  The  essence  of  the  "gift  of  the  Spirit"  is 
adoption.  Herein  Paul  is  true  to  the  noblest  teachings  of  Pharisaism; 
and  also  profoundly,  vitally  true  to  the  most  essential  teaching  of 
Jesus,  seeing  more  clearly  than  the  Galilean  apostles  themselves. 
And  if  a  son,  then  an  heir.  Herein  Paul  makes  the  polemic  inference 
required  in  the  interest  of  his  special  gospel  of  Gentile  equality.  To 
be  a  world-religion  Christianity  must  take  the  step  with  him. 

Practical  Inference:  (i)  Galatian  observance  of  the  Mosaic 
calendar  is  the  beginning  of  a  return  to  bondage,  undoing  tJie  work  of 
redemption,  4  :  8-1 1. 

8.  At  that  time.  When  the  spirit  came  ;  cf.  3  :  2.  Not  knowing 
God.  The  heathen  are  supposed  to  be  ignorant  of  the  true  God  (cf. 
Acts  17  :  23;  I  Thess.  1:9).  The  Galatians  had  evidently  been 
converted  from  heathenism,  though  the  work  doubtless  began  from 
Jewish  synagogues  (Acts  13  :  14,  43;  14  :  i,  4).  In  bondage  to  .  .  . 
no  gods.     See  on  ver.  3,  and  cf.  Heb,  2  :  15. 

9.  Paul  delights  in  the  turning  of  the  phrase  "knowing  God"  — 
somewhat  redolent  of  Jewish  self-complacency,  Rom.  2  :  1 7-20  — 
into  its  converse:  The  real  revelation  is  not  of  the  Father,  but  of  the 
Son,  God's  acknowledgment  of  "them  that  are  his"  (2  Tim.  2  :  19). 
In  I  Cor.  8  :  2-3  it  thus  reappears.  The  same  combination  is  effected 
in  a  saying  of  Jesus,  coincidently  reported  in  Mt.  11  :  27  and  Lk. 
10  :  22.  Against  the  claim  of  the  scribes  to  define  the  limits  of 
sonship  (Mt.  23  :  13)  Jesus  opposes  that  of  the  Father,  who  has 
a  prior  right  to  acknowledge  his  own ;  against  their  claim  to  have> 
the  authoritative  "knowledge  of  God"  he  advances  that  of  "the: 
son"  (generic  as  in  Jn.  8  :  35),  the  insight  of  those  who  are  like-minded 
(Mt.  5  :  8,  45).  The  combination  of  the  two  sayings  is  perhaps  duei 
to  Pauline  influence.     Weak  and  beggarly.     As  only  "clothed  withi 

88 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


and  beggarly  ^  rudiments,  whereunto  ye  desire  to  be  in 
lo.   bondage  over  again?     Ye  observe  °days,  and  months, 

»  Or,  elements 

a  little  brief  authority."  See  on  ver.  3,  and  note  Paul's  disdain  of 
the  Phrygian  tendency  to  a  "worship  of  angels"  (Col.  2  :  8-23), 
The  scientist's  formula  for  the  exorcism  of  the  "spirits"  that  obsess 
credulous  humanity  is  the  "reign  of  law";  the  Christian's  is  the  reign 
of  the  Son  of  God.  Paul  is  thus  emancipated  from  the  debasing  fear 
of  these  "gods  many  and  lords  many"  before  science  comes  to  prove 
their  non-existence. 

10.  Days,  and  months,  and  seasons,  and  years.  We  must  distinguish 
between  a  nobler  and  a  baser  type  of  Judaism  in  Paul's  day.  There 
was  (i)  the  Pharisaism  represented  by  Paul  himself,  represented  also 
by  the  Palestinian  synagogue,  as  we  see  it,  purified  from  the  super- 
stitions of  Paul's  time  by  the  great  reaction  of  the  second  century 
A.D.  There  was  also  (2)  what  Harnack  has  called  the  "  syncretistic " 
Judaism  popularly  known  throughout  the  Roman  Empire  as  a  de- 
basing superstition  of  "astrologers,  haruspices  and  quacksalvers." 
Acts  19  :  13  knows  of  Ephesus  and  Asia  as  particularly  infested 
with  this  type  in  the  form  of  "strolling  Jews,  exorcists."  It  knows 
elsewhere  (13  :  6-8)  of  the  hold  they  obtain  by  their  "magic"  in 
the  palaces  of  the  great.  Many  contemporary  evidences  survive  in 
the  form  of  amulets  and  "magic  papyri"  or  lead  rolls,  of  this  de- 
based and  mongrel  type  of  Judaism  which  made  merchandise  of  the 
reputation  of  Moses.  Paul  himself  in  this  same  region  of  Phrygia 
has  occasion  later  to  stem  the  tide  of  a  similar  mongrel  Jewish  an- 
gelolatry  (Col.  2  :  8-20).  We  need  not  then  be  surprised  to  find 
a  Christian  writer  of  ca.  140  A.D.  declaring  that  "the  Jews,  although 
they  think  that  they  alone  know  God,  do  not  know  him,  but  worship 
angels  and  archangels,  the  month  and  the  moon."  Paul  certainly 
condemns  here  implicitly  that  observance  of  sabbaths  which  in  Col. 
2  :  16  he  condemns  explicitly.  And  this  was  in  fact  to  the  Gentile 
observer  the  most  conspicuous  and  distinctive  feature  of  the  Mosaic 
system.  In  contemporary  Jewish  writings  also  the  observance  of 
the  feasts  at  exactly  the  legal  time  is  made  a  matter  of  prime  im- 
portance just  because  of  the  connection  of  this  calendar  with  the 
celestial  luminaries,  conceived  as  directly  under  the  charge  of  "angels." 
For  the  same  reason  Paul  regards  it  as  the  most  conspicuous  evidence 
of  the  Galatians'  disposition  to  return  into  the  bondage  of  the  elements 
of  the  world.  This  particular  feature  of  the  law  is  that  which  es- 
pecially marks  it  as  "given  through  angels"  (3  :  19).  What  can  be 
tolerated  as  the  scrupulousness  of  a  "weak"  conscience  in  a  born 
Jew   (Rom.    14  :  5-6),   Paul    has    no    patience    with    in    imitation 

89 


II  EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 

11.  and  seasons,  and  years.     I  am  afraid  of  you,  lest  by  any 
means  I  have  bestowed  °labour  upon  you  in  vain. 

12.  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  °be  as  I  am,  for  I  am  as  ye 

13.  are.     °Ye  did  me  no  wrong:  but  ye  know  that  because 
of  an  infirmity  of  the  flesh  I  preached  the  gospel  unto 


Mosaists.     In    the    second    century    "  sabbattizing "    was    still   more 
severely  denounced. 

11.  Labour  in  vain.  Cf.  2  :  2.  The  two  passages  are  reciprocally 
illuminative. 

(2)  Paul  entreats  the  Galatians  by  the  contrast  of  their  present  cold- 
ness with  the  zeal  and  love  of  former  days,  4  :  1 2-20. 

12.  Be  (Gr.  "become")  as  I.  The  true  rendering  of  the  first  half 
of  ver.  12  compels  the  rendering  "I  became"  in  the  second.  Paul 
is  far  from  acknowledging  that  he  is  as  the  Galatians  are.  He  he- 
catne  as  they  were  when  he  preached  to  them  at  the  first,  according 
to  his  principle  described  in  i  Cor.  9  :  19-22,  and  the  retrospect  in 
2  :  16.  Abandoning  his  Pharisaic  superiority,  he  had  put  himself 
on  the  level  of  "  sinners  of  the  Gentiles."  Now  he  has  a  right  to  expect 
that  they  shall  not  seek  a  superiority  which  he  had  relinquished  on 
their  account. 

13.  Our  ignorance  of  the  circumstances  makes  the  allusions  ob- 
scure. It  is  implied  that  Paul  had  made  two  visits  prior  to  the  time 
of  writing,  the  former  either  to  recover  health,  or  to  avoid  overtaxing 
a  weakened  frame;  in  either  case  not  conditions  to  suggest  long 
journeys  over  the  sparsely  settled  plateau  of  Galatia  proper.  See 
Introduction,  p.  21. 

Ye  did  (or  "have  done")  me  no  wrong.  In  imposing  the  obliga- 
tion to  become  also  a  "sinner"?  Cf.  2  :  17.  Or  perhaps,  "You 
never  did  me  a  wrong.  Why  then  should  I  be  your  enemy?" 
This  sense  is  preferable  to  "You  have  never  disobeyed  me." 

14.  Paul's  illness  was  a  temptation  to  strangers  to  treat  him  with 
loathing,  or  contempt.  Its  nature  has  been  variously  conjectured 
as  malarial  fever,  ophthalmia,  and  epilepsy.  The  last  is  suggested 
by  the  fuller  description  of  symptoms  in  2  Cor.  12:7,  and  especially 
by  the  expression  "spat  out"  (see  Gr.)  in  this  verse.  Epilepsy  was 
commonly  regarded  as  of  demonic  origin  (Mk.  9  :  14-29)  and  com- 
municable. Spitting  was  a  practice  specially  employed  in  such  cases, 
not  only  as  an  expression  of  loathing,  but  as  a  prophylactic.  If  this 
be  really  the  nature  of  Paul's  "stake  in  the  flesh"  which  came  to 
"buffet"  him,  lest  he  should  be  exalted  overmuch  by  the  "visions 
and  revelations"  he  enjoyed,  we  must  attribute  the  latter  not  to  the 

90 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 


14.  you  the  ^  first  time:  and  that  which  was  a  temptation 
to  you  in  my  flesh  ye  despised  not,  nor  ^  rejected ;  but 
ye  received  me  as  an  angel  of  God,  even  as  Christ  Jesus. 

15.  Where  then  is  that  gratulation  ^  of  yourselves?  for  I 
bear  you   witness,   that,   if  possible,   ye   would   have 

16.  °plucked  out  your  eyes  and  given  them  to  me.  So 
then  am  I  become  °your  enemy,  because  I  ^  tell  you  the 

17.  truth  ?  °They  zealously  seek  you  in  no  good  way ;  nay, 
they  desire  to  shut  you  out,  that  ye  may  seek  them. 

18.  But  it  is  good  to  be  zealously  sought  in  a  good  matter 
°at  all  times,  and  not  only  when  I  am  present  with 

'  Gr.  former.       ^  Gr.  spat  out.      ^  Or,  of  yours      *  Or,  deal  iruly  with  you. 

catalepsy  itself,  during  which  the  victim  is  wholly  unconscious,  but 
to  the  period  of  extreme  exaltation  which  sometimes  precedes  the 
attack.  The  Galatians,  in  spite  of  this  "temptation,"  received  Paul 
not  as  possessed  of  an  evil  spirit,  but  as  an  angel  of  God,  as  an  in- 
carnation of  the  spirit  of  Jesus.  In  Acts  14  :  11  we  have  an  instance 
of  the  extraordinary  devotion  paid  to  the  missionaries  in  this  region. 
The  fickleness  of  the  mob's  behavior  immediately  after  (14  :  19)  is 
surely  quite  equal  to  anything  attributable  to  "  Celtic  blood." 

15.  Plucked  out  your  eyes.  Affection  of  the  sight  is  said  some- 
times to  accompany  epilepsy.  But  the  figure  need  not  necessarily 
have  been  suggested  by  any  special  symptom. 

16.  Your  enemy.  The  epithet  is  probably  quoted.  It  is  the  same 
employed  of  the  sower  of  tares  in  Mt.  13  :  28  and  in  the  early  anti- 
Pauline  literature  specifically  of  Paul  himself.  The  sentence  need 
not  be  a  question,  but  an  affirmation  or  exclamation:  "So  that  now, 
by  telling  you  the  truth  I  am  become  your  "enemy"  1 

17.  They  zealously  seek.  Gr.  "are  zealous  over."  Again  the 
language  is  probably  borrowed.  The  Judaizers  explain  their  own 
activity  by  zeal  for  the  Galatians'  welfare;  for  Paul  in  offering  them 
a  gospel  without  the  yoke  of  the  law  has  been  really  their  "enemy" 
in  the  guise  of  a  friend  who  makes  the  requirements  of  salvation  easy. 
Paul  replies  that  this  kind  of  "zeal"  is  far  from  disinterested.  The 
Judaizers  are  really  interested  in  nothing  but  the  safeguarding  of 
their  own  prerogative  as  "heirs."  They  are  afraid  of  losing  their 
grasp  on  "the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  possession  of  which 
insures  their  being  paid  zealous  court  to. 

18.  At  all  times,  and  not  only  when  I  am  present.    The  contrast 

91 


4  :  19  EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 

19.  you.     °My  little  children,  of  whom  I  am  again  in  travail 

20.  °imtil  Christ  be  formed  in  you,  yea,  °I  could  wish  to 
be  present  with  you  now,  and  to  change  my  voice;  for 
°I  am  perplexed  about  you. 

21.  Tell  me,  ye  that  desire  to  be  under  the  law,  °do  ye 

22.  not  hear  the  law?  For  it  is  written,  that  Abraham  had 
two  sons,  one  by  the  handmaid,  and  one  by  the  free- 


shows  that  Paul  is  thinking  of  the  zealous  court  first  mentioned,  that 
paid  by  the  Galatians  to  him.  The  other  was  paid  in  his  absence. 
The  obscurity  of  the  sense  has  led  some  scribes  to  insert  "for  you." 
The  sense  really  requires  "for  me"  (see  van). 

19.  My  little  children.  The  endearing  epithet  is  coined  to  meet 
the  situation  Paul  describes  by  comparison  with  the  birth-pangs  of 
a  mother.  Their  first  zeal  may  have  turned  to  indifference  or  even 
hatred.     His  is  renewed  in  a  second  agony. 

Until  Christ  be  formed  in  you.  Not  individually  but  in  the  aggre- 
gate. The  Church  as  in  i  Cor.  12  :  12;  Eph.  4  :  16  becomes  an 
organism  incarnating  the  Spirit  of  Christ.  Paul's  sufferings  are  the 
birth-pangs  through  which  the  man-child  is  brought  into  the  world, 
"the  Christ  that  is  to  be." 

20.  I  could  wish.  The  fact  that  Paul  finds  it  needless  to  explain 
what  prevents  his  coming,  is  taken  by  Zahn  as  evidence  that  he  is 
more  remote  from  Galatia  than  Antioch  or  Ephesus.  See  Intro- 
duction, p.  33.  I  am  perplexed.  At  a  loss  what  to  do.  Shall  he 
"change  his  voice"  {i.e.  "tone")  from  rebuke  to  entreaty?  The  next 
paragraph  renews  the  appeal  to  scriptural  authority. 

(3)  A  warning  against  submission  to  the  yoke.  In  allegory  the 
law  itself  prefigures  the  contrast  between  the  fleshly  heir  of  Abraham^ 
a  bond-slave,  and  the  spiritual,  born  of  a  freenvoman,  4  :  21-30. 

21.  Do  ye  not  hear  the  law  ?  In  Paul's  letters  the  practice  of  Gen- 
tile churches  in  using  the  Old  Testament  in  public  worship  is  clearly 
attested,  with  a  striking  example  in  the  present  instance  of  the  rab- 
binic allegorical  interpretation  in  vogue. 

22.  Gen.  16  and  21  :  1-21  afford  to  Paul  a  "scriptural"  con- 
firmation of  his  doctrine  (3  :  8,  16,  22)  of  a  spiritual  "seed  of  Abra- 
ham "as  real  "heir  of  the  world."  In  two  respects  the  two  sons  born 
to  Abraham  are  differentiated.  The  elder,  Ishmael,  was  (a)  son  of 
a  slave-woman,  (&)  born  "after  the  flesh,"  i.e.,  in  the  ordinary  course 
of  nature.  The  younger,  Isaac,  was  born  (a)  of  a  freewoman, 
(&)  against  the  course  of  nature,  by  the  miraculous  operation  of  a 
"word  of  promise." 

9a 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 

23.  woman.  Howbeit  the  son  by  the  handmaid  is  born 
after  the  flesh ;   but  the  son  by  the  freewoman  is  °born 

24.  through  promise.  Which  things  °contain  an  allegory: 
for  these  women  °are  two  covenants;  one  from  mount 
Sinai,  bearing  children  unto  bondage,  which  is  Hagar. 

25.  °^Now  this  Hagar  is  mount  Sinai  in  Arabia,  and 
answereth  to  the  Jerusalem  that  now  is :    °for  she  is  in 

'  Many  ancient  authorities  read  For  Sinai  is  a  mountain  in  Arabia. 

23.  Born  through  {i.e.,  "by  the  agency  of")  promise.  The  point 
is  more  fully  elaborated  in  Rom.  4  :  19-21  and  9  :  9.  The  latter 
passage  conveys  the  full  Semitic  sense,  of  the  word  itself  operating  as 
the  agency  by  means  of  which  the  result  is  attained.  Isaac  for  this 
reason  was  called  in  Jewish  writings  the  "  God-begotten,"  and  in 
Christian  allegorization  becomes  a  type  of  Christ.  Thus  in  its  earliest 
manifestation  the  doctrine  of  the  supernatural  birth  applies  to  Chris- 
tians generally,  and  is  identical  with  that  of  the  "sowing  of  the  word" 
in  I  Pt.  I  :  23-25;  Jas.  i  :  18;  Jn.  i  :  11-13.  The  application  to 
Jesus  specifically  is  secondary. 

24.  Contain  an  allegory.  The  controversy  as  to  whether  we 
should  understand  "are  spoken  allegorically,"  or  "should  (or  may) 
be  understood  allegorically,"  cannot  be  decided  on  merely  philological 
grounds.  There  is  the  less  reason  for  the  attempt  in  that  to  Paul  it 
would  have  made  no  difference.  Anything  that  could  be  derived  from 
scripture  was  authoritative  for  his  time,  whether  so  intended  by  the 
author,  or  not.  See  notes  on  3  :  16  and  4  :  30.  Are  two  covenants. 
As  in  ver.  25-26  they  are  two  cities.  The  appropriateness  of  making 
Hagar  correspond  to  the  covenant  of  law  is  made  to  appear  in  several 
ways,  first  of  all  from  Hagar's  birthplace  near  the  scene  of  the  giving 
of  the  law,  second  from  her  condition  as  a  slave. 

25.  For  Sinai  is  a  mountain  in  Arabia.  (Better  reading;  see  var.) 
The  clause  has  many  variants  in  theMss.,  and  since  the  sense  seems 
much  clearer  without  it,  was  regarded  even  by  Lightfoot  as  very 
probably  a  gloss  introduced  as  a  geographical  note,  to  explain  ver. 
24.  If  retained  as  authentic  the  clause  should  at  least  be  enclosed 
in  ( ),  for  not  its  subject,  but  that  of  the  preceding  clause,  is  the  subject 
of  the  following  verb  "answereth  to."  The  tribe  of  the  Hagarenes 
has  indeed  its  habitat  "in  Arabia,"  but  there  is  no  evidence  extant 
that  the  mountain  of  the  law  known  in  the  Old  Testament  variously  as 
"Horeb"  and  "Sinai"  was  ever  called  by  this  tribal  name. 

For  she  is  in  bondage.     A  reference  at  once  to  the  political  condi- 

93 


26  EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 

26.  bondage  with  her  children.     But  °the  Jerusalem  that  is 

27.  above  is  free,  which  is  our  mother.     For  it  is  written, 
54:1  Rejoice,  thou  barren  that  bearest  not; 

Break  forth  and  cry,  thou  that  travailest  not: 
For  more  are  the  children  of  the  desolate  than  of 
her  which  hath  the  husband. 


tion  of  Jerusalem  under  the  yoke  of  Rome,  and  the  religious  condition 
of  "her  children"  under  the  yoke  of  the  law.  From  covenants  the 
metaphor  is  changed  to  cities,  by  force  of  the  constant  Semitic  figure 
of  a  city  as  "  mother"  of  its  inhabitants. 

26.  The  Jerusalem  that  is  above.  The  conception  of  the  New 
Jerusalem  belongs  already  to  messianic  prophecy,  or  rather  to  the 
conventions  of  contemporary  apocalypse.  In  Ps.  87  :  6  God  is  rep- 
resented as  counting,  as  he  makes  up  the  list  of  the  redeemed,  that 
"this  one  and  that  one  was  born"  in  Zion.  In  New  Testament 
times  the  transformation  of  prophetic  hopes  from  national  into 
cosmic  forms,  effected  by  the  apocalyptic  school,  had  changed  the 
ancient  hope  of  a  new  {i.e.  rebuilt)  Jerusalem  into  that  of  a  celes- 
tial city,  already  prepared  in  the  treasuries  of  heaven  (Heb.  11  :  16; 
12  :  22),  ready  to  be  "let  down  out  of  heaven  from  God"  (Rev. 
21  :  10)  in  the  "age  to  come."  In  an  age  which  could  not  conceive 
of  a  united  humanity  save  under  the  historic  forms  of  its  own  city- 
empires  of  Babylon  and  Rome,  the  "city  of  the  Great  King"  (Mt. 
5  :  35)  must  of  course  be  Jerusalem,  but  for  a  heavenly  king  only  a 
heavenly  city  was  admissible.  In  Rev.  21  :  9-22  :  5  the  Christian 
apocalyptist  endeavors  to  complete  the  picture  of  this  miraculous 
capital  of  the  kingdom  of  God  along  the  lines  first  traced  by  Eze- 
kiel.  These  conceptions  are  presupposed  in  substance  in  Paul's 
references  to  our  citizenship  in  heaven  in  Phil.  3  :  20  and  here,  as 
well  as  in  the  saying  of  Jesus  which  perhaps  suggests  them  and  is 
itself  suggested  by  Ps.  87,  "  Rejoice  that  your  names  are  written  in 
heaven"  (Lk.  10  :  20).  Note  especially  that  the  New  Testament 
conception  is  not  of  a  city  in  heaven  to  which  believers  go  at  death; 
but  a  city  which  comes  from  heaven  to  them  in  the  Day  of 
Christ's  appearing,  and  remains  thereafter  firm-fixed  on  the 
mountains  of  Judah,  the  central  metropolis  of  the  earth  (Rev. 
21  :  24-26). 

27.  In  "Isaiah's"  contrast  of  the  more  populous  restored  Jerusa- 
lem with  the  city  which  had  been  destroyed,  under  the  figure  of  a 
wife  once  barren  and  deserted  but  now  restored  to  her  husband  and 
fruitful  of  children,  Paul  finds  scriptural  support  for  his  figure  of 
Hagar  and  Sarah.     As  compared  with  the  Jewish  dispersion  the 

94 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 


28.  Now  ^  we,   brethren,   as  Isaac  was,   are   ^children  of 

29.  promise.  But  as  then  he  that  was  born  after  the  flesh 
°persecuted  him  that  was  horn  after  the  Spirit,  even  so 

30.  it  is  now.  Howbeit  what  saith  the  scripture?  Cast 
out  the  handmaid  and  her  son :  for  the  son  of  the  hand- 
maid shall  not  inherit  with  the  son  of  the  free  woman. 

'  Many  ancient  authorities   read   ye. 

"Israel  of  God"  was  at  this  time  a  pitiful  handful,  but  Paul  already 
foresaw  the  coming  reversal  of  conditions. 

28.  Children  of  promise.  See  note  on  ver.  23  and  cf.  Rom.  4  :  19- 
21;  9  :  7-9;  Jn.  I  :  11-13.  The  " spiritual  seed"  are  the  progeny  of 
a  "new  birth"  effected  by  "the  word  of  good  tidings  preached  unto 
you"  (i  Pt.  I  :  25),  and  thus  correspond  to  Isaac,  who  was  born 
"after  the  Spirit"  through  the  operation  of  a  "word  of  promise." 

29.  Persecuted.  Persecution  of  Christians  by  Jews  of  the  Dis- 
persion (not  by  the  Roman  power,  which  until  the  great  tragedy  at 
Rome  in  64  a.d'.  invariably  appears  as  their  protector  against  Jewish 
hatred)  is  repeatedly  referred  to  by  Paul  (6  :  12  and  iThes.  2  :  14-16), 
specifically  in  case  of  the  Galatians  themselves  (see  on  3  :  4).  The 
"persecution"  of  Isaac  by  Ishmael,  however,  requires  the  rabbinic  eye 
to  discover  in  Scripture.  Jewish  legend  interpreted  the  "playing" 
or  "mocking"  of  Ishmael  which  aroused  the  jealousy  of  Sarah  (Gen. 
21:9,  one  of  the  many  plays  upon  the  name  "  Isaac,"  as  derived  from 
the  Hebrew  stem  meaning  to  "laugh,"  "play,"  "sport")  as  at  Isaac's 
expense  ;    it  even  asserted  that  Ishmael  "shot  arrows  at  Isaac." 

30.  Paul  is  certainly  a  master  in  the  rabbinic  art  of  "scriptural" 
polemic.  Out  of  the  ancient  legend  by  which  the  Jews  exalted  Israel 
the  admittedly  younger  stock  at  the  expense  of  Ishmael,  —  i.e.,  the 
nomadic  Arabians,  —  explaining  that  these  were  sons  of  a  slave- 
mother  from  Egypt  {i.e.,  derived  from  the  Hagarenes,  a  tribe  under 
Egyptian  domination),  their  own  ancestor  on  the  contrary  being  of 
free  birth  in  the  land,  whence  the  divine  appointment  of  "the  inher- 
itance" {i.e.  Canaan),  Paul  fashions  a  weapon  against  themselves. 
It  is  they  now  who  are  claiming  "the  inheritance"  by  virtue  of 
mere  descent,  and  thus  putting  themselves  in  the  place  of  those  whom 
the  Scripture  declares  "shall  not  inherit"  but  must  be  "cast  out." 
A  similar  application  of  the  same  two  passages  (Gen.  21  :  10,  12  and 
Is.  54  :  i)  had  been  previously  made  by  Philo ;  but  with  the  more 
highly  developed  allegory  characteristic  of  Alexandrianism  Sarah's 
children,  the  fruit  of  divine  wisdom,  displace  those  of  Hagar,  derived 
from  mere  earthly  knowledge. 

95 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 


31.       Wherefore,  brethren,  we  are  not  children  of  °a  hand- 
5.     maid,  but  of  the  freewoman.^     °^With  freedom  did 
Christ  set  us  free:    stand  fast  therefore,  and  be  not 
entangled  again  in  a  yoke  of  bondage. 

2.  Behold,  I  Paul  say  unto  you,  that,  if  ye  receive  cir- 

3.  cumcision,    Christ   will   profit   you   nothing.     Yea,    I 


»  Some  ancient  authorities  read  Stand  fast  (therefore)  in  that  liberty  wherewith 
.  .  .  and  be  not.       '  Or,  For  freedom 

(4)  Concluding  Appeal.  Paul  entreats  the  Galatians  to  have  done 
with  the  Judaizers.     4  :  31-5  :  12. 

(a)    Vigilance  the  price  of  Christian  liberty,  4  :  31-5  :  i. 

The  two  verses  which  separate  the  exposition  of  Scripture  from  its 
application  are  transitional.  Interpreters  naturally  differ  as  to  para- 
graphing. The  text  also  varies,  admitting  as  at  least  equally  probable 
the  rendering:  "  But  we,  brethren,  are  not  children  of  a  slave,  but  of 
the  freewoman  by  virtue  of  the  freedom  wherewith  Christ  set  us  free. 
Stand  fast." 

4  :  31.  A  handmaid.  Sense  and  language  alike  require  the  ren- 
dering "  slave-wovadin.^' 

5  :  I.  With  freedom.  The  alternative  rendering  "for  freedom"  is 
preferable,  or  we  may  connect  the  clause  with  the  preceding  verse, 
rendering,  "Wherefore,  brethren,  we  are  not  children  of  a  bond- 
woman, but  of  the  freewoman  through  the  liberty  wherewith  Christ 
has  made  us  free."  (See  var.)  The  concluding  paragraph  of  the 
section  will  then  begin,  "Stand  fast,  then,  and  be  not  entangled  again 
in  a  yoke  of  bondage."  The  general  principle  here  laid  down  is  de- 
veloped later  in  the  practical  division  of  the  Epistle  (5  :  13-6  :  10). 
The  apostle  in  including  the  conduct  essential  to  the  welfare  of  the 
brotherhood  makes  it  his  point  of  departure  to  show  what  is  involved 
in  Christian  "freedom."  So  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  enunciated  in  3  :  1-5 
is  elaborated  as  to  its  content  in  4  :  1-7.  Previous  to  this  definition 
of  "freedom"  comes  the  special  appeal  against  the  Judaizers,  ver. 
2-12. 

(6)  Circumcision  is  not  a  mere  counsel  of  perfection,  wherewith 
the  supposed  deficiencies  of  faith  may  he  supplemented.  Its  assump- 
tion under  present  conditions  is  destructive  of  the  work  of  faith,  5  :  2-i6. 

2.  Paul's  own  principle  of  the  complete  indifference  of  the  Mosaic 
ritual  prescriptions  (ver.  6;  6  :  15)  was  liable  to  be  invoked  against 
him,  as  his  practice  under  it  already  had  been  (ver,  11).  If  indifferent, 
circumcision  could  do  no  harm,  and  might  better  be  adopted  "for 
safety."     Against  such  reasoning  Paul  now  insists  again  (see  on  2  : 

96 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


testify  °again  to  every  man  that  receiveth  circumcision, 

4.  that  he  is  a  debtor  °to  do  the  whole  law.     Ye  are 
^  severed  from  Christ,  ye  who  would  be  justified  by  the 

5.  law;   ye  are  fallen  away  from  grace.     For  we  through 
the  Spirit  by  faith  wait  for  °the  hope  of  righteousness. 

6.  For  in  Christ  Jesus  neither  circumcision  availeth  any- 


Gr.  brought  to  nought. 


15-21)  on  the  mutual  exclusiveness  of  justification  by  the  law  and  by 
grace.  Under  other  circumstances  (see  on  ver.  11)  circumcision 
might  be  indifferent.  Received  as  a  supplement  to  faith,  it  is  a  testi- 
mony of  distrust,  the  negation  of  faith,  which  is  the  fundamental 
condition  of  profit  from  Christ. 

3.  Again.  See  3  :  10-12  and  notes.  It  is  vital  to  Paul's  argu- 
ment to  show  that  the  compromising  attitude  of  the  Judaizers,  rep- 
resented in  Mt.  19  :  17-21;  Acts  13  :  39;  Jas.  2  :  21-22,  is  untenable. 
One  cannot  rely  for  "justification"  partly  on  grace  and  partly  on 
merit;  for  the  two  are  mutually  exclusive.  To  do  the  whole  law. 
The  Judaizers  themselves  did  not  insist  upon  all  the  Mosaic  require- 
ments (6  :  13),  and  showed  here  the  weakness  of  their  position.  In 
fact  even  the  Jewish  propaganda  in  the  Dispersion  showed  startling 
discrepancies  in  this  respect.  Jas.  2  :  lo-ii  endeavors  in  another 
way  to  check  the  inconsistency. 

4.  To  realize  the  exceptional  stress  laid  by  Paul  upon  the  complete 
abandonment  of  all  reliance  upon  merit  we  must  recall  his  personal 
religious  experience  (Phil.  3  :  3-10;  Rom.  7  :  9-1 1).  To  bring  the 
general  mass  of  believers  in  Christ  to  a  similar  experience  was  a  task 
which  even  a  Paul  found  impossible. 

5.  The  hope  of  righteousness.  Abstract  for  concrete,  as  in  Col. 
1:5;  Tit.  2  :  13  ;  Heb.  6  :  18.  Grammatically  the  clause  might  mean 
"the  hope  of  being  justified"  (in  the  judgment).  In  the  light  of  the 
developed  parallel,  Rom.  8  :  19-25,  it  is  certain  that  Paul  means  the 
hope  given  to  the  righteous  (Rom.  8  :  24  ;  Col.  1:5;  Heb.  6  :  18). 
This  hope,  including  all  the  blessings  of  the  messianic  kingdom,  is 
awaited  on  both  sides.  The  Judaizers  rest  their  expectations  on 
fleshly  descent,  and  obedience  to  the  law  ;  Paul  and  those  like-minded 
on  the  "earnest"  of  the  Spirit  of  adoption  (Eph.  i  :  14)  and  the 
faith  which  had  been  the  beginning  of  their  redemption ;   cf.  2  :  20. 

6.  The  indifference  of  circumcision  is  reasserted  as  a  principle, 
but  only  by  virtue  of  the  fact  that  "faith  working  through  love"  has 
become  the  master  motive.  Hence  resort  to  it  to  supplement  the 
possible  insufficiency  of  grace  is  not  indifferent,  because,  as  already 

H  97 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 


thing,  nor  uncircumcision ;  but  faith°  ^working  through 
love. 

7.  Ye  were  running  well;    ^  who  did  hinder  you  that 

8.  ye  should  not  obey  the  truth?     °This  persuasion  came 

9.  not  of  him  that  calleth  you.     A  little  leaven  leaveneth 

10.  the  whole  lump.  I  have  confidence  to  you-ward  in 
the  Lord,  that  ye  will  be  none  °otherwise  minded: 
but  °he  that  troubleth  you  shall  bear  his  judgement, 

11.  whosoever  he  be.  But  I,  brethren,  °if  I  still  preach 
circumcision,  why  am  I  still  persecuted?    then   hath 

'  Or,  wrought  '  A  few  ancient   authorities  read  who  did  hinder  you  ?    Be 

persuaded  by  no  one  against,  the  persuasion  oj  the  truth. 

shown,  the  negation  of  faith.  He  who  takes  this  course  has  no  faith; 
he  is  not  "in  Christ  Jesus."  Working  (not  "wrought,"  aUcrnative 
rend  ring)  through  love.  Paul  is  approaching  the  practical  section, 
in  which  the  objection  will  be  met  that  to  remove  the  motive  of  legal 
obligation  will  result  in  moral  laxity.  Faith  also  results  in  works,  and 
therefore  may  even  as  a  rule  be  judged  by  them  (6  :  7,  i  Cor.  3:13; 
2  Cor.  5  :  10),  but  it  does  not  depend  on  them, 
(c)   The  agitators  and  their  false  charge,  5  :  7-12. 

7.  The  sense  and  grammar  are  much  improved  by  following  the 
variant  reading,  which  has  good  though  not  abundant  manuscript 
support. 

8.  This  persuasion.    That  which  is  "against  the  truth." 

9.  A  proverbial  saying  employed  similarly  in  i  Cor.  5  :  6.  The 
suggestion  is  that  the  reaction  can  only  be  explained  by  outside  in- 
terference. 

10.  Otherwise  minded.  I.e.,  than  myself;  cf.  Phil.  3  :  15.  He 
that  troubleth.  A  singular  here,  against  a  plural  in  i  :  7.  Paul's 
threat  is  directed  against  even  the  most  influential  of  the  disturbers, 
with  manifest  allusion  to  "those  of  repute"  in  Jerusalem  (2  :  2,  6,  g). 

11.  If  I  still  preach  circumcision.  A  defence  against  the  charge 
of  inconsistency.  The  Judaizers  allege  that  Paul  himself,  when  he 
finds  it  politic,  still  recommends  circumcision.  This  charge  has  a 
certain  support  in  the  incident  of  the  circumcision  of  Timothy,  a 
Galatian  of  Lystra,  Greek  on  the  father's  side,  very  shortly  before  the 
outbreak  of  the  Judaizing  opposition,  by  Paul  himself,  expressly  for 
the  purpose  of  conciliating  "the  Jews  that  were  in  those  parts" 
(Acts  16  :  3).     Previous  to  the   Judaizing  reaction,  Paul   may  very 

98 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


12.  the  °stumblingblock  of  the  cross  been  done  away.  I 
would  that  they  which  unsettle  you  would  even  °  ^  cut 
themselves  off. 

'  Or,  mutilate  themselves 

well  have  taken  the  step  described  in  Acts  i6  :  1-3.  The  use  of  the 
word  "still"  in  his  reply  to  the  charge  seems  to  indicate  just  this 
distinction  in  time.  On  the  general  relation  of  Acts  to  Galatians,  and 
the  real  course  of  events  after  the  first  appearance  of  the  "false  breth- 
ren,"  see  Introduction,  p.  30  ff.,  and  Appended  Note  B.  Stumbling- 
block  of  the  cross.  Cf.6  :  12.  The  two  passages  furnish  a  clear 
intimation  that  to  Paul  at  least,  and  to  Jews  like-minded,  Christianity 
could  have  been  tolerated  but  for  its  undermining  of  the  authority  of  the 
Law.  But  for  the  interpretation  of  the  cross  as  assuring  a  "right- 
eousness not  through  the  law"  (2  :  21  ;  cf.  Rom.  i  :  17)  there  would 
have  been  no  persecution  by  the  Synagogue.  This  was  the  unpai-- 
donable  "offence of  the  cross,"  i  Cor.  i  :  23.  Lightfoot  paraphrases: 
"So  I  have  adopted  their  mode  of  justification  ;  I  am  silent  about  the 
Cross  of  Christ !  no  one  takes  offence  at  my  preaching  now  ;  all  goes 
on  pleasantly  enough!" 

12.  Cut  themselves  off;  or,  "mutilate  themselves."  In  spite  of 
what  jars  upon  the  sensibilities  of  the  modern  reader  as  savoring  of 
coarseness,  we  can  only  say,  with  Lightfoot,  the  alternative  rendering 
"seems  alone  tenable."  In  fact  since  circumcision  is  the  rite  in 
question,  and  Paul  has  just  been  placing  Mosaic  ritual  ordinances  on 
a  level  with  those  of  the  "world-rulers"  or  "Elements,"  it  is  at  least 
conceivable  that  he  has  in  mind  the  self-castration  of  the  Phrygian 
priests  of  Cybele,  as  parallel  to  circumcision.  If  the  rite  is  to  be  con- 
ceived as  a  means  of  attaining  merit  with  God,  then  the  heathen  form 
of  the  rite  is  even  preferable,  as  more  thoroughgoing.  If  such  be 
Paul's  meaning,  his  plain  language  has  at  least  the  merit  of  dissipat- 
ing all  further  attempts  to  represent  him  as  recommending  circum- 
cision as  a  work  of  merit.  The  alternative  interpretation,  "Would 
that  they  would  sever  their  connection  with  the  brotherhood,"  finds 
meagre  point  of  attachment  in  the  context. 


99 


III.  Practical  Exhortation.    Paul  shows  that  the 
Principle  of  Freedom  does  not  lead  to  License, 

BEING   BASED   UPON   THE    DOMINATION   OF   THE   SpIRIT 

OF  Love,  which  impels  to  Purity  and  Kindness. 
In  the  Individual  this  Spirit  gives  control 
over  the  impulses  of  the  Flesh.    In  the 
Brotherhood  it  checks  all  Strife,  and 
impels  Strong  and  Weak  to  Recipro- 
cal   Service.     In    a    Special    Fare- 
well, WRITTEN  WITH  HIS  OWN  HaND, 

Paul   epitomizes   the   Teaching 
OF   ms   Letter,   5  :  13-6  :  18. 

I.    The  moral  effect  of  Christian  freedom  is  shown   to    be        5  •  ^3 
the  curbing  of  the  flesh,  and  the  peaceful  progress  of  the 
brotherhood  in  mutual  service,  5  :  13-6  :  10 

13.       For  ye,   brethren,   were  called  for  freedom;    only 
use  not  your  freedom  for  °an  occasion  to  the  flesh,  but 

General  Proposition  :  Christian  freedom  leads  not  to  indulgence  of 
the  flesh,  bid  to  mutual  service,  and  thus  meets  the  ideal  of  the  law^ 

13.  A  return  to  the  point  established  in  4  :  1-5  :  12,  made  in  order 
to  discriminate  the  true  from  the  false  inference.  The  false  inference 
drawn  by  Paul's  detractors  (see  on  2  :  17  and  cf.  the  "slander,"  Rom. 
3  :  8)  is  that  without  the  obligation  of  law  there  will  be  no  restraint 
to  the  passions.  An  occasion  (Gr.  a  sally-port,  place  from  which  to 
launch  an  attack).  The  man  who  has  been  accustomed  to  refrain 
from  evil  only  through  fear  of  penalty  thinks  thus  of  freedom.  He 
forgets  that  there  is  no  freedom  save  to  those  in  whose  life  the  Spirit 
has  become  dominant  (2  :  20).  And  this  Spirit  is  that  of  him  who 
"  took  upon  him  the  form  of  a  servant  and  became  obedient  unto  the 
death  of  the  cross"  (Phil.  2  :  5-1 1). 

lOI 


5  :  14  EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


14.  through  love  be  servants  one  to  another.     For  °the 
Lev.  19 :  18           whole  law  is  fulfilled  in  one  word,  even  in  this ;   Thou 

15.  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself.  But  if  ye  bite 
and  devour  one  another,  take  heed  that  ye  be  not  con- 
sumed one  of  another. 

1 6.  °But  I  say,  °Walk  by  the  Spirit,  and  ye  °shall  not  fulfil 


14.  Preeminently  in  the  practical  exhortations  which  form  the 
closing  division  of  every  letter  of  Paul  to  his  churches,  he  approxi- 
mates to  the  sayings  of  Jesus  reported  in  the  Gospels. 

The  whole  law  is  fulfilled,  i.e.,  in  the  observance  of  one  maxim, 
not 'is  summarized.'  C/.  ver.  21;  6:  2.  The  " new^ commandment " 
of  Christ  is  not  here  expressly  attributed  to  him  as  in  Mt.  22  :  38, 
though  not  in  the  parallels  (Mk.  12  :  29  =  Lk.  10  :  27).  The  origi- 
nality of  the  ethics  of  Jesus  lies  not  in  his  epitome  of  the  spirit  of  the 
Law,  however  noble ;  for  Hillel  and  others  had  similarly  expressed  it. 
It  lies  in  the  substitution  of  inward  likeness  to  the  Father  for  obedience 
to  prescription  as  the  note  of  sonship  (with  Mt.  5  :  43-48  =  Lk.  6  : 
27-36;  cf.  Eph.  4  :  31-5  :  2).  Paul  and  Mark  (Phil.  2  :  5-1 1;  cf. 
Mk.  10  :  43-45)  express  this  by  describing  "the  mind  which  was  in 
Christ  Jesus";  "Matthew"  and  "Luke"  by  formulating  his  teaching 
into  a  "new  law."  In  Rom.  13  :  8-10  Paul  repeats  the  principle 
'Love  fulfils  the  law'  with  more  explicit  application. 

15.  Equally  characteristic  of  Paul  as  of  "John"  is  the  exhorta- 
tion, "Little  children,  love  one  another."  Division  and  strife,  whether 
at  Corinth  (i  Cor.  i  :  10-13),  i^^  Asia  (Eph.  4  :  1-3;  Col.  2  :  2;  3  : 
12-15),  3.t  Philippi  (Phil.  2  :  1-4),  and  even  where  Paul's  face  was 
not  known  (Rom.  14  :  1-15  :  7),  is  the  danger  that  supremely  moves 
his  soul  for  the  churches.  To  meet  it  he  has  always  the  same  remedy, 
"the  mind  of  Christ,"  a  forbearing,  forgiving,  ministering  spirit  of 
love,  which  "never  faileth"  {cf.  i  Cor.  cc.  12-14).  The  presence  of 
the  opposite  spirit  among  the  Galatians  is  a  symptom  of  their  back- 
ward movement,  and  portends  disaster.  This  phase  of  the  subject 
is  resumed  in  5  :  25-6  :  6. 

(i)  The  mind  of  the  Spirit  leads  of  itself  to  the  curbing  of  the  fleshy 
5  :  16-24. 

16.  But  I  say.  Better,  "What  I  mean  is";  see  on  3  :  17  and 
4  :  I.  Walk  by  the  Spirit.  The  doctrine  of  the  Spirit  is  the  founda- 
tion of  the  Church,  as  historically  the  coming  of  the  Spirit  was  its 
origin.  This  we  have  already  seen  (see  on  3  :  2).  But  the  personal 
religious  experience  of  Paul  gave  to  his  particular  application  of  the 
doctrine  a  new  and  mystical  trend,  which  is  not  Jewish  but  Hellenis- 
tic, and  ultimately  Stoic.    To  the  ordinary  Christian,  such  as  those 

102 


EPISTLE  TO  THE  GALATIANS 


17.  the  lust  of  the  flesh.  For  the  flesh  lusteth  against  the 
Spirit,  and  the  Spirit  against  the  flesh;  for  these  are 
contrary  the  one  to  the  other;   that  ye  may  not  do  the 

18.  things  that  ye  would.     But  if  ye  are  led  by  the  Spirit, 


addressed  in  iCor.  cc.  12-14,  or  as  the  author  of  Acts,  the  "gifts  of  the 
Spirit"  are  preeminently  the  phenomena  of  "tongues,"  "miracles," 
"healings,"  such  as  a  Simon  Magus  may  seek  the  power  of  conveying 
for  money  (Acts  8  :  14-19);  though  the  impulse  to  extraordinary 
acts  of  self-sacrifice  is  also  included  (Acts  2  :  44;  4  :  33-35;  i  Cor. 
13  =  3)'  To  Paul  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  is  the  infusion  from  God  of  a 
portion  of  his  own  nature,  identical  in  substance  with  that  of  Christ 
and  with  the  latent  power  in  all  men  which  he  designates  in  Rom. 
7  :  22,  23  "the  inward  man"  or  the  "mind,"  The  reenforcement of 
the  "mind"  by  this  infusion  from  God  of  the  "mind  of  Christ"  makes 
men  God's  sons  by  adoption,  as  being  henceforth  predominantly 
controlled  by  his  Spirit;  for  the  battle  between  flesh  (controlled 
since  Adam's  transgression  by  "  sin  ")  and  spirit,  which  previously  had 
been  constantly  and  inevitably  a  losing  fight,  becomes  thereafter  with 
equal  certainty  victorious.  All  mere  outward  "manifestations  of 
the  Spirit,"  such  as  "tongues,"  "miracles,"  "prophecies,"  are  nec- 
essarily temporary  and  subordinate  to  the  ethical,  since  sonship  is 
seen  rather  in  likeness  to  God's  goodness  than  to  his  power,  and  su- 
premely in  "love,"  which  was  the  key-note  in  the  character  of  Jesus. 
The  mystery  of  the  correlation  of  the  individual's  own  will  and  per- 
sonality with  the  infused  Spirit  Paul  does  not  attempt  to  solve.  The 
individual  ego  remains  and  seeks  to  "work  out  his  own  salvation," 
unhindered  by  the  consciousness  that  even  in  willing  as  well  as  doing 
"it  is  God  that  worketh  in  us."  To  "walk  in  (or  by)  the  Spirit"  is 
therefore  a  proper  form  of  exhortation  even  to  those  fully  conscious 
of  the  "adoption  of  sons";  cf.  Rom.  8  :  12-14;  Phil.  2  :  12-13  ;  i  Cor. 
13.  The  Pauline  mysticism  is  founded  on  an  antithesis  of  flesh  and 
spirit  alien  to  earlier  Hebrew  thought.  To  understand  it  requires 
both  an  appreciation  of  Stoic  influence  in  the  later  literature,  and 
sympathetic  remembrance  of  Paul's  special  religious  experience 
(Phil.   3  :  5-7 ;   Rom.   7  :  9-25). 

Shall  not  fulfil.  Better  "will  surely  not."  The  word  is  not  an 
imperative  but  a  strengthened  form  of  the  future. 

17.  Cf.  Rom.  7  :  18-25,  where  the  warfare,  as  including  also  the 
period  before  the  gift  of  the  Spirit,  is  between  the  "mind"  and  the 
flesh. 

18.  Cf.  Rom.  8  :  14,  15 ;  Jn.  15  :  15.  Sonship  and  servitude  are 
mutually  exclusive  terms.    The  proof  was  given  in  4  :  1-7. 

103 


19  EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 

19.  ye  are  not  under  the  law.  Now  the  works  of  the  flesh 
are  manifest,   which  are  these,  °fornication,  unclean- 

20.  ness,  lasciviousness,  idolatry,  °sorcery,  °enmities,  strife, 

21.  jealousies,  wraths,  factions,  divisions,  ^  heresies,  envy- 
ings,  °drunkenness,  revellings,  and  such  like:  of  the 
which  I  ^  forewarn  you,  even  as  °I  did  ^  forewarn 
you,   that  they  which  practise  such  things  shall  not 

22.  ^inherit  the  kingdom  of  God.     But  °the  fruit  of  the 

'  Or,  parties  '  Or,  tell  you  plainly 

19.  The  impulses  of  "flesh"  under  control  of  "sin"  fall  into  three 
classes  in  accordance  with  actual  manifestations  in  the  environment 
of  the  Pauline  churches:  (a)  Fornication  ,  .  .  idolatry.  The  group- 
ing is  characteristic  of  the  times,  immorality  being  chiefly  practised 
in  connection  with  idol  worship;  cf.  the  "pollutions  of  idols"  in  Acts 
15  :  20,  29 ;  I  Thess.  4  :  4,  5 ;  i  Cor.  10  :  1-22 ;  Rom.  i  :  24-27 ;  Eph. 
5  •  3~5 !  Co^-  3  •  5-  Sorcery  is  kindred  as  a  "holding  converse  with 
demons"  (i  Cor.  10  :  14-22;  Acts  19  :  19;  Rev.  21  :  8;  22  :  15). 

20.  Enmities  .  .  .  heresies,  envyings.  A  single  group  (b)  all 
springing  from  the  divisive  spirit  referred  to  in  ver.  15.  "Heresy" 
in  New  Testament  use  has  still  its  etymological  sense  of  "factiousness," 
quite  independent  of  the  truth  or  falsity  of  the  doctrine  contended  for. 

21.  Drunkenness,  revellings.  We  should  expect  these  to  be  men- 
tioned in  connection  with  the  "pollutions  of  idols,"  ver.  19;  for  the 
reference  is  to  the  scandal  referred  to  in  Eph.  5  :  11,  12,  the  carousings 
of  orgiastic  religious  clubs,  whose  banquets  were  a  prominent  feature 
of  Graeco-Roman  social  life,  and  are  contrasted  with  the  sobriety  and 
purity  of  the  well-conducted  Christian  conventicle  in  Eph.  5  :  18-20. 
I  did  forewarn  you.  Paul  is  not  now  making  a  belated  attempt  to 
forestall  the  evil  consequences  of  a  former  laxity.  When  he  first  pro- 
claimed his  gospel  of  justification  apart  from  works  of  the  law  he  had 
been  no  less  strenuous  than  the  Judaizers  themselves  in  rebuking  these 
"pollutions." 

Inherit  the  kingdom  of  God.  It  is  specially  interesting  to  note  how 
in  taking  this  common  ethical  ground  he  falls  naturally  into  the  phrase- 
ology of  the  Gospels ;  cf.  i  Cor.  6  :  9,  10;    15  :  50;  Mk.  25  :  34. 

22.  The  fruit  (not  "works")  of  the  Spirit  is  the  converse  of  the 
preceding,  qualities  that  make  for  the  welfare  of  the  individual  and 
brotherhood  alike.  Faithfulness  (Gr.  "faith").  Here,  as  in  Mt. 
23  :  23;  Tit.  2  :  10,  'fidelity,'  'trustworthiness.'  The  active  and  pas- 
sive senses  of  the  word  were  both  current.    Temperance,    The  alter- 

104 


EPISTLE  TO  THE   GALATIANS 


Spirit  is  love,  joy,  peace,  longsufifering,  kindness,  good- 

23.  ness,  °faithfulness,  meekness,  °  ^  temperance :  °against 

24.  such  there  is  no  law.  And  they  that  are  of  Christ 
Jesus  have  crucified  the  flesh  with  the  passions  and  the 
lusts  thereof. 

25.  If  we  live  °by  the  Spirit,  by  the  Spirit  let  us  also 

26.  walk.  Let  us  not  be  vainglorious,  provoking  one 
another,  envying  one  another. 

6.  Brethren,  even  if  a  man  be  °overtaken  in  any  tres- 
pass, °ye  which  are  spiritual,  restore  such  a  one  in  a 
spirit  of  meekness;    looking  to  thyself,  lest  thou  also 

'  Or,  self-control 

native  rendering  should  be  preferred,  since  that  of  the  text  is  sometimes 
limited  in  modern  use. 

23.  Against  such.  The  law  is  conceived  as  essentially  prohibi- 
tive. There  is  no  restraint  upon  those  whose  impulse  is  in  this  direc- 
tion ;  for  who  ever  heard  of  the  prohibition  of  such  acts  ? 

24.  No  other  impulse  remains  in  the  true  Christian,  because  the 
act  of  faith  was  a  decisive  victory  in  the  mortal  conflict  of  spirit  against 
flesh ;  c/".  2  :  20. 

(2)  Dominance  of  the  Spirit  will  also  correct  all  the  divisive  ten- 
dencies in  the  brotherhood,  5  :  25-6  :  6. 

(a)  It  will  prevent  friction  in  the  church,  5  :  25-26, 

25.  A  reiteration  of  ver.  16  for  the  purpose  of  returning  to  the 
complementary  effect  of  life  "by  the  Spirit." 

By  the  Spirit,  by  the  Spirit.  The  first  dative  expresses  means,  the 
second  manner ;     cf.   Rom.   8:  i-ii. 

26.  Friction  has  come  through  lack  of  the  right  spirit  in  the  rela- 
tion between  superiors  and  inferiors  in  the  brotherhood;  cf  Phil. 
2  :  3-4.  "Speaking  truth"  must  be  "in  love,"  Eph.  4  :  15.  A 
"vainglorious"  ruler  is  himself  a  "provoker"  and  instils  "envy"  in 
his  subordinate. 

(6)  The  rule  for  "those  who  admonish,"  6  :  1-5. 
6:  I.     Overtaken,  f.e.,  '  Caught,' 'detected';   not  'overcome  by.* 
Ye  which  are  spiritual.    I.e.,  have  the  "spiritual  gifts,"  particu- 
larly in  this  case  that  of  "governments."    The  address  is  to  those 
"that  have  the  leadership";  cf  i  Cor.  2  :  13,  15  ;  3  :  i ;  12  :  i ;  14  :  17. 
The  reciprocal  service  of  "him  that  is  taught"  (Gr.  "the  catechumen") 

105 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 


2.  be  tempted.     Bear  ye  one  another's  "burdens,  and  so 

3.  °fulfil  °the  law  of  Christ.     For  if  a  man  thinketh  himself 
to  be  something,   when  he  is  nothing,   he  deceiveth 

4.  himself.    But  let  each  man  prove  °his  own  work,  and 
then  shall  he  have  his  °glorying  in  regard  of  himself 

5.  alone,  and  not  of  ^  his  neighbour.     For  each  man  shall 
bear  his  own  ^  burden. 

«  Gr.  tite  other.        »  Or,  load 

is  emphasized  in  ver.  6.  In  i  Thess,  5  :  11-15,  under  the  general 
direction  to  exhort  and  edify  one  another,  the  order  is  reversed. 
"Those  that  admonish"  are  charged  to  perform  their  office  with 
"long-suffering  toward  all."  The  admonition  for  which  they  appear 
responsible  covers  a  wide  range.  Here  "restoration"  refers  to  stand- 
ing in  the  brotherhood. 

2.  Burdens.  A  dififerent  Greek  word  from  that  used  in  ver.  5. 
Here  that  which  bears  down  ;  in  ver.  5  that  which  is  contributed  to. 
It  may  very  probably  be  chosen  like  the  term  'law'  with  special  refer- 
ence to  the  'burdens'  of  the  law  (Lk.  11  :  46;  Rev.  2  :  25)  the  Gala- 
tians  are  prone  to  assume.  What  Paul  means  by  bearing  such 
appears  from  Rom.   15  :  1-3. 

Fulfil.  The  reading  found  in  some  Mss.  with  future  indicative 
instead  of  imperative  is  the  more  probable. 

The  law  of  Christ.  The  reference  is  not  to  a  specific  teaching, 
even  the  "new  commandment"  of  love  as  the  epitome  of  the  law 
(see  on  5  :  14),  but  to  Jesus'  principle  of  rulership,  the  constitutional 
principle  of  his  kingdom,  Mk.  10  :  42-45;   cf.  Phil.  2  :  5-1 1. 

3.  "Those  who  admonish"  are  still  addressed.  Only  the  wish 
to  serve,  and  the  sense  of  dependence  on  the  Spirit  for  the  means  of 
serving,  can  rightly  qualify  them.  "Vainglory"  is  not  only  injurious 
but  senseless. 

4.  His  own.  Strongly  emphasized.  Judgment  will  sometimes 
be  unavoidable  for  men  so  placed  (Paul  is  still  addressing  the  leaders). 
But  the  faculty  should  be  mainly  directed  to  one's  own  performance, 
not  another's.  One's  sense  of  confidence  then  will  be  based  (if  it 
finds  foundation)  on  progress  over  one's  own  past,  not  disesteem 
of  others.  Cf.  Mk.  9  :  50,  "Salt  for  yourselves  :  for  one  another 
peace";    and  Mt.    7  :  1-5. 

Glorying  (elsewhere  "boasting").  Almost  a  Pauline  technical 
term  for  the  Pharisaic  sense  of  merit  or  self -righteousness.  Here, 
ground  of  confidence  before  the  tribunal  of  conscience.     See  on  6  :  14. 

5.  This  keeping  to  oneself  of  one's  judgment  of  merit  or  demerit 

106 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 


6.  But  let  him  that  is  taught  in  the  word  °cominunicate 
unto  him  that  teacheth  in  all  good  things. 

7.  °Be  not  deceived ;    °God  is  not  mocked:   for  °what- 

8.  soever  a  man  soweth,  that  shall  he  also  reap.  For  he 
that  soweth  unto  his  own  flesh  shall  of  the  flesh  reap 
corruption;   but  he  that  soweth  unto  the  Spirit  shall  cf 


is  the  more  imperative  because  the  task  or  "load"  of  each  has  its 
own  peculiar  difficulties. 

(c)  The  rule  for  him  that  is  taught,  6  :  6. 

6.  Paul  now  turns  to  the  "catechumen."  His  part  is  the  minis- 
tration of  "carnal  things,"  since  the  spiritual  have  not  been  com- 
mitted to  him.  Cf.  Rom.  15:  27;  i  Cor.  9  :  11.  Communicate. 
The  word  is  used  in  a  somewhat  technical  sense,  as  in  the  admonition 
**  To  do  good  and  to  communicate  {i.e.,  contribute  to  the  needy)  forget 
not;  for  with  such  sacrifices  God  is  well  pleased." 

(3)  Moral  aspect  of  Paul's  gospel.  In  general,  so  far  from  shield- 
ing self-indulgence  or  idleness,  the  principle  of  freedom  leaves  the  great 
cosmic  law  of  retribution  unimpaired;    therefore  work,  6  :  7-10. 

7.  The  paragraph  division  should  be  sharply  marked  after  ver.  6. 
With  ver,  7  Paul  turns  to  his  final  and  general  exhortation. 

Be  not  deceived,  viz.,  by  the  statements  of  "slanderers"  that  the 
Pauline  teaching  removes  the  incentive  of  reward  for  right-doing  and 
conversely. 

God  is  not  mocked,  as  would  be  the  case  if  an  evil  life  might  be 
lived  with  impunity  in  anticipation  of  a  death-bed  repentance,  a  dis- 
counting of  grace.  The  failure  to  observe  the  break  between  this 
new  paragraph  and  ver.  6  results  in  comments  such  as  the  following : 
"Christians  do  not  always  reflect  that  they  are  trying  to  mock  God 
when  they  withhold,  of  their  worldly  possessions,  what  he  requires." 
This  reflection  is  indeed  unlikely  to  have  occurred  to  the  Galatians 
before  or  after  receipt  of  Paul's  letter.  It  is  still  more  unlikely  that 
the  Judaizers  were  encouraging  niggardly  giving. 

Whatsoever  a  man  soweth.  A  proverbial  expression  of  the  uni- 
versal principle  of  moral  retribution.  Paul's  doctrine  does  not  pre- 
sume to  deny  or  set  it  aside. 

8.  On  the  contrary,  his  doctrine  of  flesh  and  spirit  already  enun- 
ciated (see  on  5  :  16  and  cf.  Rom.  c.  8)  is  the  very  apotheosis  of  this 
principle.  It  remains  in  the  man's  own  choice  to  cultivate  the  field 
of  "the  flesh"  already  impregnated  with  the  germs  of  "corruption," 
or  the  field  of  "the  spirit,"  whose  essential  nature  is  to  give  life  eter- 
nally (Rom.  8  :  6,  11;  I  Cor.  15  :  22,  45-46). 

107 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 


9.   the  Spirit  reap  eternal  life.     And  let  us  not  be  weary 
in  well-doing:    for  in  due  season  we  shall  reap,  if  we 

10.  faint  not.  So  then,  °as  we  have  opportunity,  let  us 
work  that  which  is  good  toward  all  men,  and  especially 
toward  them  that  are  of  the  household  of  the  faith. 

2.  In  a  postscript  appended  with  his  own  hand  Paul 
epitomizes  the  general  admonition  of  his  letter,  pro- 
nouncing a  blessing  on  such  as  are  worthy,  and  bidding 
the  brethren  farewell  in  Christ,  6  :  11-18 

11.  See  with  how  large  letters  I  °^  have  written  unto  you 

12.  with  mine  own  hand.  As  many  as  desire  to  make  a 
fair  show  in  the  flesh,  they  compel  you  to  be  circum- 

'  Or,  write 

9.  Beside  this  operation  of  the  Spirit  in  our  own  bodies,  as  it  were 
by  its  very  intrinsic  nature,  there  is  a  further  reward  for  service  done 
in  behalf  of  others;  cf.  i  Cor.  3  :  10-15.  This  reward,  given  at  the 
season  God  has  appointed,  should  be  a  further  incentive  to  good 
works  rendered  with  unflagging  zeal.     Cf.  2  Thess.  3  :  13. 

10.  As  we  have  opportunity.  Better,  "since  we  have  a  period 
appointed";  c/^.  Jn.  11  :  9.  The  reference  seems  to  be  to  the  "due 
season"  of  ver.  9.    The  variant  reading  is  less  probable. 

11.  As  Paul,  according  to  a  custom  referred  to  in  2  Thess.  3  :  17; 
I  Cor.  16  :  21;  and  Col.  4  :  18,  takes  over  in  his  own  hand  the  pen 
of  the  amanuensis  to  whom  he  has  been  dictating  (Rom.  16  :  22),  he 
seems  to  be  struck  half  humorously  with  the  contrast  between  his  own 
big  and  laborious  letters,  and  the  fair  copy  of  the  professional  Greek 
scribe.  As  is  apt  to  be  the  case,  especially  with  those  more  unaccus- 
tomed to  the  pen,  he  comments  on  its  unpleasing  appearance.  The 
"fair  show  in  the  flesh"  is  not  his  part  (ver.  12).  He  leaves  that  to 
the  Judaizers,  as  he  leaves  the  external  matter  of  the  handwriting  of 
his  letter  to  the  amanuensis.  Such  seems  to  be  the  bearing  of  the 
singular  allusion.  Grammatically  it  is  perhaps  possible  to  render 
"how  large  a  letter,"  and  some  taking  this  sense  suppose  Paul  to  be 
calling  his  readers'  attention  to  the  length  of  the  epistle  he  has  been 
obliged  to  write,  though  unable  (why  does  not  appear)  to  command 
the  services  of  a  letter  writer.  But  Galatians  is  not  long  enough  to 
require  very  great  manual  effort  for  even  an  unpractised  hand.    More-. 

108 


EPISTLE  TO   THE   GALATIANS 


cised;    °only  that  they  may  not  be  persecuted  ^for  the 

13.  cross  of  Christ.  For  not  even  they  who  ^  receive 
circumcision  do  themselves  keep  ^  the  law ;  but  they 
desire  to  have  you  circumcised,  that  they  may  glory  in 

14.  your  flesh.  But  far  be  it  from  me  °to  glory,  save  °in 
the  cross  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  through  ^  which 
°the  world  hath  been  crucified  unto  me,  and  I  unto  the 

'  Or,  by  reason  of  '  Some  ancient  authorities  read  have  been  circumcised. 
3  a  law      •♦  Or,  whom 

over  on  this  interpretation  all  connection  with  ver.  12  is  lost.  It 
seems  more  probable  that  in  this  quaint  touch  we  have  indeed  a 
"token"  of  authenticity  not  dreamed  of  by  Paul. 

Have  written.  Better  with  alternative  rendering,  "  I  write."  Greek 
idiom  in  such  cases  requires  the  past.  The  writer  places  himself  at 
the  point  of  view  of  the  correspondent  addressed.  Only  that  they 
may  not  be  persecuted.  See  on  5  :  11.  It  is  implied  that  Chris- 
tianity would  have  been  tolerated  by  the  Synagogue  if  the  crucifixion 
had  not  been  interpreted  as  "changing  the  customs  delivered  by 
Moses."  This  lends  color  to  the  supposition  that  the  Pharisaic  per- 
secution in  which  Paul  himself  had  been  a  leader  was  provoked  by 
anti-legalistic  teaching;   cf.  Acts  6  :  14. 

13.  See  on  3  :  II ;  5  :  3.  Were  the  proselyting  zeal  of  the  Juda- 
izers  really  due  to  the  disinterested  desire  to  see  the  law  everywhere 
honored,  they  would  not  inconsistently  dispense  from  part  of  its 
requirement  {cf.  5  :  14;  Mt.  23  :  23).  The  real  motive,  according  to 
Paul's  perhaps  somewhat  intolerant  judgment,  is  selfish.  Besides 
obtaining  a  cessation  of  the  persecutions  suffered  because  Christianity 
is  understood  to  be  anti-legalistic,  they  will  have  the  "glory"  promised 
in  Dan.  12:3,  for  the  sake  of  which  the  Pharisean  propagandist  was 
ready  to  "compass  sea  and  land,"  Mt.  23  :  15.  That  it  is  not  so  much 
in  the  sight  of  men  as  before  the  divine  Judge,  appears  from  the  con- 
trasted "glorying"  of  Paul,  See  note  following.  To  glory.  The 
"glorying"  or  "boasting"  which  Paul  deprecates,  whether  in  his  own 
case  or  the  Judaizers  (ver,  13),  or  the  self-righteous  Jew  (Rom,  2  :  17), 
or  Abraham  (Rom,  4  :  2),  is  not  a  sense  of  merit  in  the  eyes  of  men 
so  much  as  in  the  eye  of  God.     Hence  his  own  "glorying." 

14.  In  the  cross  of  Christ;  i.e.,  it  is  his  plea  for  justification  at  the 
divine  tribunal,  "Boasting"  is  thus  in  Paul's  use  almost  a  synonym 
for  "the  righteousness  of  the  scribes  and  Pharisees"  in  Synoptic  use. 
The  world  hath  been  crucified  unto  me.  See  on  2  :  20.  "Dying  unto 
sin"  by  faith  in  the  love  of  God  displayed  in  the  cross,  and  "rising 

109 


6  :  15  EPISTLE  TO  THE  GALATIANS 

Ps.  125:5;    15.   world.     For    neither    is    circumcision    anything,    nor 
"  '        16.   uncircumcision,  but  a  new  ^  creature.    And  as  many 
as  shall  walk  by  this  rule,  peace  be  upon  them,  and 
mercy,  and  upon  °the  Israel  of  God. 

17.       From  henceforth  let  no  man  trouble  me:   for  I  bear 
branded  on  my  body  °the  marks  of  Jesus. 

»  Or,  creation 

again"  out  of  its  dominion  by  infusion  of  the  Spirit  of  adoption  alters 
the  believer's  attitude  to  the  entire  creation  {cf.  Rom.  8  :  10-23). 
The  world  is  in  fact  for  all  practical  purposes  a  "new  creation";  old 
things  exist  no  more,  all  things  become  new  in  "the  light  of  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  glory  of  God  {cf.  Ex.  ^;^  :  17-23;  34  :  5-8)  given  in  the 
face  of  Jesus  Christ."  This  manifestation  of  the  Son  with  its  implica- 
tion of  redemption  to  the  cosmos  is  the  work  of  him  "who  said  (Gen. 

1  :  i)  Light  shall  shine  out  of  darkness"  (2  Cor.  4:6).  To  the  be- 
liever thus  the  cross  "crucifies  the  (old)  world,"  or  crucifies  him  to  it. 

15.  A  repetition  of  the  basic  principle  of  5  :  6,  but  with  the  sub- 
stitution of  the  cosmic  for  the  ethical  aspect  of  the  redemption.  The 
strong  statement  of  ver.  14  is  justified  by  this  principle  of  the  cross, 
since  it  proves  that  God  cares  not  for  a  mere  mark  in  the  flesh,  but 
for  the  utter  transformation  of  the  whole  man.  Several  ancient  au- 
thors declare  this  "rule"  to  be  quoted  from  the  Jewish  writing.  The 
Apocalypse  of  Moses  {ca.  40  A.D.).     Paul  makes  use  of  such  in  i  Cor. 

2  :  9  and  elsewhere,  particularly  the  Apocalypse  or  Assumption  of 
Moses  itself  in  Eph.  i  :  9-12,  if  we  are  not  mistaken. 

16.  The  limitation  of  the  blessing  is  a  kind  of  threat.  Cf.  i  :  10; 
Paul's  voice  is  still  for  war. 

The  Israel  of  God.  Men  who,  "though  Jews  by  birth,  yet  because 
they  have  learned  that  a  man  is  not  justified  by  works  of  the  law,  but 
only  through  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  have  believed  in  Christ  Jesus  that 
they  might  be  justified  by  faith  in  Christ,"  2  :  15-16.  Yet  not  these 
alone.  The  expression  includes  all  true  Christians,  but  the  Hebraic 
form  {cf.  Ps.  125  :  5  ;  128  :  6)  is  chosen  to  show  that  Paul  has  no  preju- 
dice against  the  Jew  as  such,  but  only  against  those  who  refuse  to 
"walk  by  this  rule." 

17.  It  is  remarkable  that  Paul  should  borrow  his  closing  note  of 
defiance  from  the  heathen  formulae  in  customary  use  upon  amulets 
and  in  incantations,  "Let  no  man  trouble  me,  for  I  bear  .  .  .  ."  The 
expression  the  marks  of  Jesus  may  very  probably  refer  to  scars  of 
Paul's  many  stripes,  or  even  specifically  to  the  recent  marks  of  the 

no 


EPISTLE  TO  THE  GALATIANS  6  :  i8 

i8.       The  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  be  with  your 
spirit,  brethren.    Amen.^ 

'  Add  subscription  Unlo  the  Galatians,  written  from  Rome.  Others  further  by 
Paul  and  the  brethren.    Others  further  by  the  hand  of  Titus.    Others  further  and  Luke. 

lictors'  rods  in  Philippi  (i  Thess.  2:2;  Acts  16  :  22-23).  The  word 
{stigma)  is  employed  of  branding  or  tattoo  marks  which  placed  the 
wearer  under  the  protection  of  some  patron  or  divinity.  In  regard  to 
the  rest  of  the  verse  it  is  probable,  since  the  discovery  in  Egypt 
of  many  amulets  and  charms  with  similar  inscriptions,  that  Paul  pur- 
posely adopts  the  figure  from  heathen  magic  in  order  to  synibolize 
how  as  partaker  of  the  sufferings  of  Christ  he  is  also  under  his  pro- 
tection. 

18.  The  parting  benediction  is  brief  and  formal;  but  as  such  the 
Galatians  would  at  least  know  it  to  be  sincere. 

The  so-called  "subscriptions"  appended  by  later  copyists,  in- 
creasing in  length  with  lateness  of  date,  are  of  no  value.  They  merely 
illustrate  the  exclusive  dependence  of  tradition  on  the  book  itself 
for  their  information.  Thus  the  statement  "written  from  Rome" 
is  known  to  be  based  on  a  wrong  inference  from  4  :  20. 


Ill 


APPENDED   NOTES 


NOTE  A.    THE   CONTENT   OF  PAUL'S   GOSPEL 

NOTE   B.    THE      JERUSALEM     COMPACT,     AND      THE 
APOSTOLIC   DECREES 

NOTE  C.    JUSTIFICATION    BY    FAITH,    APART    FROM 
WORKS  OF  LAW 


APPENDED   NOTE    A 

THE  CONTENT  OF  PAUL'S   GOSPEL 

In  the  note  on  i  :  i6  it  has  been  intimated  that  the  emphasis  of 
Paul's  message  was  otherwise  placed  than  by  those  who  had  known 
Jesus  "after  the  flesh."  To  him  particular  sayings  and  incidents 
of  Jesus'  earthly  ministry  were  of  value  only  as  accessory  to  the  great 
fact  that  the  man  of  Nazareth  had  been  "by  the  resurrection  from 
the  dead  miraculously  declared  to  be  the  Son  of  God  promised  in  the 
holy  scriptures"  (Rom.  i  :  4;    cf.  Acts  17  :  31). 

Paul  had  come  to  recognize  through  a  divinely  wrought  opening 
of  the  eyes  of  his  soul  this  promised  "Son  of  God."  This  gave  him 
his  "gospel."  In  the  Being  whom  he  thus  designated  Paul  saw  not 
so  much  the  national  Deliverer  of  Israel  as  the  deliverer  of  humanity 
from  the  thraldom  of  "flesh"  and  its  attendant  doom.  A  larger 
sense  attaching  to  the  term  Son  of  God  was  inevitable  in  a  convert 
of  larger  experience,  training,  and  mode  of  thought  than  the  Galilean 
apostles.  But  Paul's  Deliverer  of  humanity  was  no  other  than  that 
Friend  of  Sinners  whose  independent  attitude  toward  synagogue 
orthodoxy  had  erstwhile  provoked  his  fanatical  antagonism.  The 
implications  of  the  recognition  were  momentous.  But  to  appreciate 
its  significance  one  must  enter  a  realm  of  thought  scarcely  touched 
in  the  Synoptic  Gospels.  As  every  one  realizes,  the  system  of  thought 
in  which  Christ  appears  as  the  Second  Adam,  rescuing  a  doomed 
race  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death  implanted  in  its  members  by  the 
infusion  of  a  higher  dynamic,  the  "law  of  the  Spirit  of  life,"  is  widely 
different  from  that  preached  by  Jesus  in  Galilee.  Is  it  legitimate 
to  identify  the  two? 

Clearly  Paul's  antecedent  ideas  were  profoundly  tinged  with 
Hellenistic  stoicism  (see  note  on  2  :  19).  By  as  much  as  these  were 
broader  in  scope  than  those  of  the  Galilean  apostles,  by  so  much  must 
Paul's  conception  of  "grace  in  Christ"  exceed  theirs,  once  he  had 
abandoned  the  attitude  of  legalistic  exclusiveness.  What  in  their 
case  had  been  glad  tidings  for  "publicans  and  sinners,"  became 
inevitably,  for  one  who  brought  to  his  acceptance  of  the  Christ  the 
presuppositions  of  the  Roman  citizen  of  Tarsus  and  the  pupil  of 
Gamaliel,  a  gospel  of  salvation  for  all  the  posterity  of  Adam.  It 
was  still  essentially  a  doctrine  of    salvation  by  "repentance  toward 

115 


APPENDED   NOTE   A 


God  and  faith  toward  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ"  (Acts  20  :  21);  but  it 
must  now  include  also  "sinners  of  the  Gentiles"  (2  :  15),  —  nay,  it 
must  include  the  whole  universe  of  rational  beings.  Every  knee, 
whether  of  beings  on  earth,  or  above  or  under  it,  must  bow  to  this 
Son  of  God,  because  it  is  for  the  manifestation  of  him  and  his  that 
the  creation  has  been  groaning  hitherto.  Paul's  gospel  is  therefore 
"a  revelation  by  the  resurrection"  that  Jesus  is  "the  Son."  And 
because  this  Son  has  relation  to  the  whole  creation  of  God  —  is,  as 
Paul  says,  a  "Second  Adam"  —  the  revelation  of  him  constitutes 
of  itself  a  commission  to  "preach  him  to  the  Gentiles,"  the  sinners 
of  Israel  having  already  received  the  proclamation,  Rom.  i  :  2-4; 
Acts  17  :  31. 

Of  the  two  terms  of  Paul's  simple  creed,  "Jesus  is  the  Christ," 
a  creed  given  to  him  out  of  heaven,  neither  could  be  altered  in  its 
essential  content  by  anything  later  learned  from  other  Christians. 
Not  that  he  did  not  welcome  amplification.  The  title  "Christ" 
obtained  a  more  and  more  exalted  sense  as  Paul  brought  the  wild 
dreams  of  apocalyptic  thought  under  subjection  to  the  ethical  prin- 
ciples of  the  law  of  Love.  The  name  "Jesus"  he  gladly  filled  with 
larger  meaning  by  subsequent  conference  with  Peter  (ver.  18);  though 
even  this  continued  fundamentally  to  signify  to  Paul  what  it  had 
already  signified  to  him  as  a  persecutor,  viz.,  the  man  who  in  his  life, 
his  teaching,  his  death,  had  done  the  utmost  conceivable  to  break 
down  the  system  of  Pharisaic,  legalistic  salvation.  But  the  outline 
remains  the  same.  Paul's  gospel  is  complete  in  the  simple  declara- 
tion, "Jesus  is  the  Christ,"  or  in  more  truly  Pauline  language, 
"Jesus  is  Lord."  ^  Formerly  this  had  driven  Paul  to  the  extremity 
of  rage  against  the  Nazarene.  Now  that  his  attitude  toward  "the 
law"  was  reversed  his  Pharisaic  exclusiveness  was  changed  to  hu- 
manitarian inclusiveness.  The  one  all-dominating  characteristic 
of  Paul's  historic  Jesus  remained  that  he  was  "the  end  of  the  law" 
(Rom.  10  :  4;  cf.  Rom.  passim  and  Gal.  4  :  4,  5).  As  regards  the 
other  term  of  his  creed,  Paul's  definition  of  "the  Christ"  would  neces- 
sarily obtain  its  chief  enlargement  from  other  sources  than  the  teach- 
ing of  his  fellow-Christians.  He  purposely  disregarded  the  merely 
nationalistic  ideal  as  "fleshly"  (Rom.  i  :  3;  2  Cor.  5  :  16).  It  must 
be  confessed  too  that  the  ethical  sonship  always  fundamental  with 
Jesus  (Mt.  5  :  45)  tends  to  be  overshadowed  in  Paul's  mind  by  the 
apocalyptic  expectations  of  "the  Lord  from  heaven."  The  Old 
Testament  passages  which  could  be  interpreted  of  a  transcendental 
and  preexistent  Being,  Ps.  8:7;  no  :  i  (i  Cor.  15  :  25-27);  Dt. 
30  :  12-14;  Ps-  68  :  19  (Rom.  10  :  6-8;  Eph.  4  :  8-10)  were  those 
on  which  Paul  based  his  conception,  just  as  apocalyptic  literature, 
already  tinctured  with  Gentile    dualism  and    Greek    cosmological 

*  Cf.  Rom.  10  :  9;   i  Cor.  8:6;   12  :  3;  2  Cor.  4  :  s;   Phil,  a  :  11. 
116 


APPENDED   NOTE   A 


speculation,  had  itself  become  predominantly  cosmic  and  humani- 
tarian. Like  Paul  it  already  conceives  the  redemption  as  a  deliverance 
of  humanity  from  the  curse  inherent  in  the  race  since  Adam's  fall. 
And  the  "wisdom"  literature  is  even  more  strongly  humanitarian 
and  universalistic.  We  cannot  wonder  that  it  should  seem  to  Paul 
rather  the  duty  of  the  Church  to  come  up  to  the  largeness  of  this 
universalistic  conception  of  the  Christ  "  promised  afore  by  the  proph- 
ets in  the  holy  scriptures,"  than  his  duty  to  limit  his  "spiritual" 
view  by  the  literalness  of  those  who  only  knew  a  Christ  "after  the 
flesh." 

And  Paul  had  his  way.  The  Greek  humanitarian  idea  of  "  re- 
demption" prevailed  over  the  Jewish  nationalistic.  The  test  of 
orthodoxy  became  the  confession  "Jesus  is  Lord"  (Rom.  lo  :  9; 
I  Cor.  12  :  3;  2  Cor.  4:5),  interpreted  as  in  Phil.  2  :  9-1 1.  What 
Paul  found  in  the  person  of  Jesus  identified  with  the  preexistent 
Wisdom  of  God,  through  whom  the  world  was  created,  the  next 
generation  identified  with  the  Logos  of  Greek  philosophy,  as  Philo 
a  generation  earlier  had  already  done  with  the  Wisdom  of  Prov.  8, 
Ecclus.  24,  and  Wisd.  of  Sol.,  but  without  the  intermediate  link  of 
incarnation.  There  is  difference  here.  There  is  sweeping  advance. 
But  there  is  no  perversion.  What  Paul  found  in  the  personality  of 
Jesus  subsequent  generations  have  found,  will  find,  and  are  entitled 
to  find.  Whether  Jesus  himself  did  or  did  not  think  of  his  mission 
as  destined  ever  to  extend  beyond  the  "lost  sheep  of  the  house  of 
Israel "  does  not  affect  the  case.  In  showing  to  these  the  way  of  access 
to  "sonship"  he  in  fact  did  "open  the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  all 
believers."  To-day  it  is  only  a  plain  matter  of  shrewd  observation 
that  "there  is  no  other  name  under  heaven  given  among  men  whereby 
we  may  be  saved,  save  the  name  of  Jesus."  The  foundation  of  ulti- 
mate religion  rests  where  Paul  laid  it,  in  the  person  of  Jesus  the  Son 
of  God. 


»7 


APPENDED   NOTE  B 


THE  JERUSALEM   COMPACT,  AND  THE  APOSTOLIC 
DECREES 

Much  confusion  is  caused  by  failure  to  distinguish  between  the 
questions  settled  at  Paul's  wholly  amicable  interview  with  the  "pillars  " 
at  Jerusalem,  and  the  question  left  unsettled,  which  gave  rise  to 
the  painful  scene  at  Antioch  described  in  Gal.  2  :  11-20,  and  through 
it  to  all  the  misunderstanding,  estrangement,  and  strife  of  the  years 
between  the  First  Missionary  Journey  and  Paul's  arrest.  Luke 
indeed  passes  over  this  misunderstanding  and  strife  in  silence,  but 
they  are  superabundantly  evidenced  by  all  the  Pauline  Epistles. 

Both  Paul  and  Luke  make  it  clear  that  the  question  of  circum- 
cising Gentile  converts  and  requiring  them  to  keep  the  Mosaic  law 
was  raised  in  Jerusalem  at  this  time  and  promptly  settled  in  the 
negative.  Luke  even  reports  that  Peter  appealed  to  a  precedent, 
established  by  himself.  Paul  declares  that  the  objections  raised 
were  a  reaction  against  an  earlier  attitude  of  approval.  Both  imply 
greater  toleration  in  the  earlier  period.  Nothing  is  more  probable. 
If  even  Jewish  propagandists  dispensed  from  circumcision,^  the 
Christian  reactionaries  cannot  have  had  great  hopes  from  the  "pil- 
lars." According  to  Paul  the  indorsement  of  his  gospel  of  freedom 
from  the  law  obtained  at  this  private  interview  was  the  end  of  the 
matter  so  far  as  any  apostolic  countenancing  of  the  demands  of  the 
reactionaries  was  concerned.  On  this  point  also  Luke  is  in  absolute 
accord.  To  doubt  it  is  doubly  absurd,  because  insistence  on  the  yoke 
of  the  law  would  have  made  a  rapid  propaganda  of  the  faith  among 
Gentiles  impossible,  besides  contradicting  the  whole  spirit  of  Jesus' 
reform.  Even  the  Nazarenes  interpreted  the  breaking  of  "the  yoke 
of  his  burden"  first  in,  "Galilee  of  the  Gentiles,"  afterwards  in  "the 
land  of  deep  darkness"  in  Is.  9  :  1-7,  of  the  work  of  Jesus  and  of 
Paul?    Gentile  freedom  from  the  law  was  almost  axiomatic. 

We  may  go  a  step  farther  still  in  determining  the  agreements  of 
Paul  with  Luke.  The  compact  of  mutual  non-interference  is  in  its 
very  nature  a  recognition  by  Paul  of  the  inviolability  of  Peter's 
"apostleship  of  the  circumcision"  as  truly  as  a  recognition  by  the 

osephus,  Ant.  XX.  ii.  4.    '  ^tTomt,Comtnentai'yon  JSy,noX^  on  Is.  9  :  i,  Opera, 
allarsi,  VqU  IV-  p.  130. 

X18 


ed.  Va 


APPENDED   NOTE   B 


Pillars  of  Paul's  "  apostleship  of  the  uncircumcision."  Paul  agrees 
not  to  dissuade  Jews  already  evangelized  from  observing  the  law.  In 
planting  himself  firmly  upon  this  ground  Luke  is  perfectly  within 
the  implications  of  Paul's  own  story.  It  is  also  clear,  however, 
from  the  very  Diary  itself  that  Paul  made  no  scruple  of  preaching 
freedom  from  the  law  to  unevangelized  Jews.  In  fact  the  synagogue 
was  his  habitual  door  of  entrance  in  new  fields.  In  omitting  all 
reference  to  the  division  of  missionary  fields,  and  to  the  request  of 
the  Pillars  for  financial  aid,  Luke  is  doing  no  more  than  we  should 
expect;  for  these  are  just  such  "private"  understandings  as  are  im- 
plied in  Paul's  description  of  the  conference.  But  if  the  conference 
was  so  completely  amicable,  how  could  the  disagreement  come  about  ? 
—  If  we  follow  Luke's  narrative  there  not  only  %vas  no  disagreement, 
but  there  could  he  none,  since  the  difficulty  had  been  foreseen  and 
provision  made  to  meet  the  case  by  official  enactment  of  four  "de- 
crees." Only  by  following  Paul  against  Luke  is  there  room  for  its 
occurrence.  For  the  divergence  is  precisely  here,  that  Luke  inserts 
these  public  legislative  enactments  in  his  story  of  the  (second)  Jeru- 
salem conference,  while  Paul  explicitly  excludes  them. 

An  inherent  defect  of  the  agreement  between  Paul  and  the  Pillars, 
taking  Paul's  own  account  of  it,  was  its  failure  to  provide  for  mixed 
communities.  The  compact  is  limited  to  mutual  non-interference. 
To  Paul  there  was  here  no  difficulty,  because,  as  we  see  from  his 
argument  against  Peter  and  Barnabas,  he  assumed  that  other  Jews 
when  among  Gentiles  would  do  as  he  did  himself,  viz.,  become  "as 
without  the  law  to  them  that  are  without  the  law."  To  his  mind 
anything  else  was  inconsistent  with  the  Christian's  fundamental 
principle  of  salvation  by  faith  in  Christ  alone.  By  taking  their  stand 
upon  this  they  had  "destroyed"  the  law,  and  could  not  "build  it 
up  again"  without  "confessing  themselves  transgressors."  James, 
Peter,  and  John  were  less  likely  to  realize  this  defect  in  the  compact, 
partly  from  lack  of  rabbinic  training,  partly  because  they  had  not 
had  Paul's  experience  among  the  Gentiles.  At  all  events  the  question 
what  the  Jew  is  to  do  who  wishes  to  observe  the  law,  and  cannot 
do  so  without  withdrawing  from  his  Gentile  brother-Christian,  was 
left  unsettled  at  the  conference.  The  proof  is  that  Peter  at  Antioch 
does  not  know  what  to  do,  but  is  first  swayed  by  Paul's  example, 
then  by  those  "from  James."  "The  rest  of  the  Jews"  and  "even 
Barnabas"  are  equally  uncertain,  but  finally  take  sides  against  Paul. 
On  this  point  and  this  alone  was  there  ever  disagreement  among  the 
apostles.  There  is  no  intimation  anywhere  that  Peter  and  Barna- 
bas proposed  to  reimpose  circumcision  and  "the  yoke  of  the  law" 
upon  Gentile  believers.  The  thing  would  be  an  absurdity  at  any 
time,  a  thousand-fold  more  absurd  in  the  half-Gentile  church  of 
Antioch,  when  but  shortly  before  the  question  had  already  been 
oflBicially  decided  in  their  favor  at  Jerusalem.     Paul  does  not  utter 

119 


APPENDED   NOTE   B 


a  syllable  indicative  of  this  incredible  perfidy.  He  reproaches  Peter 
with  inconsistency  for  wishing  to  retain  his  own  ceremonial  superiority 
as  a  Jew,  and  thus  exerting  indirectly  a  kind  of  moral  coercion  upon 
the  Gentiles.  The  old  question,  shall  the  Gentiles  be  free  from  the 
law,  is  not  raised  at  all.  None  of  the  parties  to  this  controversy  have 
the  slightest  idea  of  reopening  it  at  Antioch.  But  its  settlement  has 
brought  up  the  new  question.  How  then  shall  the  Jew  retain  his 
cleanness  if  he  eats  with  Gentile  believers  ? 

We  have  seen  how  Paul  answered  this  question,  and  that  his  an- 
swer was  not  satisfactory  to  the  Jews.  It  is  not  satisfactory  to  Luke. 
Those  who  had  indorsed  Paul's  gospel  of  freedom  from  the  law  for 
Gentiles  had  had  no  idea  of  admitting  that  Jews  were  free.  But  the 
indorsement  of  Paul's  gospel  as  from  God,  once  given,  could  not  be 
rescinded.  Barnabas,  Peter,  even  James,  were  irrevocably  com- 
mitted to  the  doctrine  that  the  Gentiles  are  saved  "apart  from  works 
of  law."  They  could  only  insist  that  Paul  and  his  followers  should 
exercise  no  coercion  upon  Jews,  nor  invade  Jewish  territory,  with 
an  iconoclastic  propaganda.  Paul  admits  this;  and  Luke  knows  it. 
What  Paul  will  not  admit  is  the  converse,  entrance  into  Gentile  ter- 
ritory by  apostles  of  the  circumcision  and  "coercion  of  the  Gentiles 
to  live  as  do  the  Jews."  The  mere  setting  of  the  example  of  regard 
for  Mosaic  distinctions  of  meats  is  to  him  "coercion,"  Gal.  2  :  14. 

How  extremely  careful  Paul  was  to  avoid  giving  offence  by  dis- 
regard of  the  law  among  Jews,  how  scrupulously  observant  he  was 
of  his  side  of  the  compact,  is  evidenced  over  and  over  again  in  the 
great  Epistles.  This  itself  argues  for  similar  respect  on  the  other  side. 
Recrudescence  of  the  propaganda  of  the  "false  brethren"  there  was; 
invasion  there  was  of  Paul's  mission  field,  particularly  that  in  which 
he  had  worked  with  Barnabas;  but  certainly  not  with  the  conni- 
vance or  sanction  of  Peter,  Barnabas,  or  James.  Paul,  under  the 
strained  relations  of  the  situation  after  the  conflict  at  Antioch,  makes, 
as  we  should  expect,  no  further  appeal  to  the  Pillars  to  stop  it.  But 
the  notion  that  Peter,  or  John,  or  even  James,  ever  so  stultified  them- 
selves as  to  oppose  the  gospel  of  Gentile  freedom  from  the  law  which 
they  had  once  unqualifiedly  indorsed,  is  inadmissible.  On  the  con- 
trary, after  Paul  had  covered  all  the  field  allotted  to  him  "from  Jeru- 
salem round  about  unto  Illyricum"  and  was  undertaking  his  last 
great  missionary  campaign  to  the  very  confines  of  the  west,  we  find 
him  hopefully  undertaking  another  great  Gentile  Christian  embassy 
to  Jerusalem.  Surrounded  by  a  company  of  delegates  from  all 
the  provinces  of  his  Greek  mission  field,  Paul  "went  in  unto  James" 
bearing  the  fruits  of  Gentile  bounty  in  fulfilment  of  the  promise  made 
so  many  years  before.  It  was  a  momentous  interview,  to  obtain 
which  the  great  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  had  willingly  risked  his  life  ; 
but  it  certainly  was  not  hopeless.^ 

'  Cf.  Rom.  15  :  30-33. 


APPENDED   NOTE  B 


We  have  the  less  reason  to  question  the  general  outline  of  the  story 
of  Acts  at  this  point,  that  the  Diary  itself  leads  up  to  and  beyond  the 
very  threshold  of  that  audience.  True  it  breaks  off  at  the  point 
where  "Paul  vi^ent  in  with  us''  and  the  story  is  rewritten,  with  large 
expansions  and  introduction  of  apologetic  speeches.  But  why  should 
we  doubt  Luke's  general  statement  of  fact?  Paul  surely  at  this  time 
went  as  far  as  his  principles  would  allow,  to  prove  how  loyally  he  had 
lived  up  to  the  compact.  He  could  justly  claim  to  have  scrupulously 
abstained  from  any  propaganda  of  his  gospel  of  anti-legalism  in 
Jewish  Christian  territory  (Rom.  15  :  20).  He  had  even  changed 
his  mode  of  life  there  to  avoid  giving  offence  (i  Cor.  9  :  20).  Why 
then  might  he  not  assume  the  charges  and  perform  the  sacrifices  for 
the  Nazirites  in  the  temple  as  James  requested?  Taken  as  an  il- 
lustration of  the  Pauline  principle,  "all  things  to  all  men,"  "circum- 
cision is  nothing  and  uncircumcision  is  nothing,  but  a  new  creation," 
the  transaction  itself  is  scarcely  open  to  reasonable  objection.  The 
objection  lies  against  its  employment  to  defend  a  different  principle, 
opposed  to  that  which  Paul  considers  vital ;  and  in  A  cts  21 :  20-26 
it  is  so  employed. 

It  is  needless  here  to  repeat  what  has  already  been  said  in  the  Intro- 
duction regarding  the  view-point  of  Luke  on  the  two  questions  of 
Paul's  apostleship  and  his  gospel.  Luke  forsakes  Paul  at  the  point 
where  Paul  breaks  with  Peter  and  Barnabas  and  the  rest  of  the  Jews 
at  Antioch.  He  thoroughly  agrees  with  the  spirit  of  the  compact  of 
mutual  non-interference,  that  the  gospel  of  circumcision  shall  be 
preached  in  Petrine  territory,  and  the  gospel  of  Hberty  from  the  law 
in  Pauline.  Indeed  from  the  Jewish  point  of  view  he  is  more  con- 
sistent with  it  than  Paul.  For  to  Paul  the  gospel  of  circumcision  is 
not  a  true  gospel  but  in  part  a  delusion.  Paul  spares  it  for  the  sake 
of  peace  and  goodwill;  but  he  cannot  indorse  it.  To  Luke  it  is.a  real 
gospel,  "another  gospel,"  which  Jews  are  under  divine  obligation  to 
keep.  Luke  is  not  in  sympathy  with  the  idea  that  Jews  are  free 
from  the  law.  On  this  point  he  stands  with  the  Pillars.  Hence  the 
concessions  without  which  fellowship  in  mixed  churches  would  be 
impracticable,  and  which  Paul  demands  as  of  right  from  the  Jews, 
Luke  imposes  as  "  necessary"  upon  the  Gentiles.  It  is  but  the  logical 
result  of  this,  together  with  his  general  assumptions  regarding  apos- 
tolic infallibility,  that  determines  his  version  of  the  Jerusalem  Con- 
ference.   To  him  it  is  a  true  Apostolic  Council. 

The  real  visit  of  Paul  and  Barnabas,  undertaken  on  account  of  the 
"false  brethren  privily  brought  in,  which  came  in  to  spy  out  (Anti- 
ochian)  liberty,"  remains  indeed  in  Luke's  narrative.  He  has  even  re- 
tained a  hint  of  its  occasion,  the  report  of  multitudinous  Gentile  con- 
versions at  Antioch  carried  to  Jerusalem,  with  the  consequent  sending 
of  Barnabas  (Acts  11  :  22).  Traces  of  its  outcome  also  remain  in 
the  taking  back  of  Mark  and  the  First  Missionary  Journey.     Just 


APPENDED   NOTE   B 


as  in  Galatians  Paul's  description  of  his  field  of  work  antecedent  to 
the  compact  includes  only  Syria  and  Cilicia  without  mention  of  Cy- 
prus and  Galatia,  and  the  compact  itself  mainly  concerns  a  division 
of  territory /or  the  future;  so  even  Acts  has  traces  that  the  so-called 
Famine-relief  Visit  is  the  visit  of  the  Antiochian  leaders.  In  Acts, 
however,  the  real  significance  of  this  momentous  but  "private"  visit 
is  eclipsed  by  the  introduction  of  a  version  of  Paul's  "ministration" 
of  the  Gentiles  which  assimilates  it  to  Josephus'  story  of  the  minis- 
tration of  Helena  of  Adiabene  during  the  famine  of  46  a.d.  For 
this  purpose  "Agabus,"  a  figure  who  really  belongs  to  the  later  story 
{cf.  21  :  10),  is  brought  in  to  prophesy  the  famine,  whereupon  the 
Antiochian  Christians  send  their  relief  before  its  outbreak.  The 
question  of  Gentile  evangelization  is  postponed.  But  the  inherent  im- 
probability of  Gentile  Christianity  in  Antioch  remaining  so  long  un- 
molested, and  the  surviving  traces  of  the  materials  embodied,  are 
all  against  this  representation. 

Not  till  after  the  First  Missionary  Journey  has  fully  justified  itself 
by  its  divine  inception  no  less  than  by  its  glorious  results  does  Luke 
permit  the  question  of  the  reactionaries  to  be  at  last  brought  up  in 
Jerusalem.  Paul  and  Barnabas  now  go  up  a  second  time,  but  merely 
as  delegates  of  Antioch,  and  all  questions  are  settled  by  unanimous 
decision  of  "the  apostles  and  elders."  The  Apostolic  Council  obvi- 
ates all  the  controversy  "concerning  meats"  and  "eating  with  Gen- 
tiles" by  four  decrees  enacted  to  safeguard  from  "the  pollutions  of 
idols"  the  Jews  among  the  Gentiles  who  "hear  Moses  read  every 
Sabbath  in  the  synagogues." 

To  appreciate  why  critics  generally  regard  these  decrees  as  abso- 
lutely excluded  by  Paul's  account  of  his  conference  with  the  Pillars 
it  is  needful  to  recognize  their  intrinsic  bearing  and  the  purpose  for 
which  Luke  himself  considers  them  to  be  introduced. 

They  are  not  regarded  in  Acts  as  trenching  in  any  degree  on  the 
principle  that  Gentile  converts  are  to  be  free  from  the  law.  That 
was  a  yoke,  as  Peter  says,  "which  neither  we  nor  our  fathers  were 
able  to  bear."  The  question  whether  Gentiles  could  be  saved  with- 
out the  law  had  been  settled,  as  he  reminds  the  assembly,  "a  good 
while  ago."  The  decrees  are  proposed  and  carried  without  a  word 
of  dissent,  "not  to  trouble  them  which  from  among  the  Gentiles  turn 
to  God  ";  but  somehow  for  the  advantage  of  the  Jews  among  the  Gen- 
tiles who  "in  every  city  hear  Moses  read  every  sabbath  in  the  syna- 
gogues." Their  intrinsic  character  shows  how  they  were  expected 
to  operate  to  the  advantage  of  these. 

In  regard  to  three  of  the  four  requirements  it  is  clear  that  the  pro- 
hibition applies  to  meats.  The  Gentile  Christian's  table  will  present 
no  snare  to  his  Jewish  brother-Christian  because,  while  not  strictly 
kosher  according  to  the  highest  standard  of  Pharisaism,  it  will  avoid 
the  causes  of  permanent  uncleanness  which  the  Jew  in  Gentile  lands 

122 


APPENDED   NOTE   B 


holds  in  abhorrence  because  they  affect  the  inward  man,  or  the  life. 
By  abstaining  from  "meats  offered  to  idols"  he  escapes  the  danger 
of  "communion  with  demons"  (i  Cor.  lo  :  19-22).  By  abstaining 
from  "blood"  he  escapes  the  similar  danger  incurred  through  sacri- 
lege against  "the  life"  of  the  animal  (Gen.  9  :  4;  Lev.  7  :  22-27). 
The  eating  of  "things  strangled"  involves  a  similar  danger,  because 
"the  life"  has  not  been  permitted  to  "return  to  God  who  gave  it." 
But  why  the  special  prohibition  of  "fornication,"  as  though  the 
Jewish  believer  could  be  involuntarily  contaminated  by  the  moral 
laxity  of  the  Gentile  ?  So  long  as  it  was  not  realized  that  this  was  in 
actual  fact  the  belief  of  primitive  Christians,  the  naming  of  "forni- 
cation" among  the  "decrees"  seemed  to  constitute  an  exception. 
It  raised  a  barrier  against  understanding  them  as  "necessary"  con- 
ditions of  fellowship  between  the  two  kinds  of  Christians.  However 
great  heathen  laxity  in  this  respect,  who  could  thus  assume  that  any 
body  of  real  Christians  might  tolerate  sexual  immorality?  For  this 
reason  many  impossible  suppositions  have  been  made,  even  the  sugges- 
tion that  "the  apostles  and  elders"  undertook  to  impose  on  Gentile 
churches  the  Mosaic  limitations  of  consanguinity  in  marriage,  calling 
the  type  of  wedlock  in  which  many  of  their  Gentile  Christian  brethren 
were  living  "fornication."  Such  incredible  shifts  only  show  the 
perplexity  of  the  interpreter.  In  reality  we  have  plenty  of  evidence 
that  the  "fornication"  so  common  in  heathenism  as  to  be  the  typical 
"pollution  of  idols,"  and  needing  repeatedly  to  be  warned  against 
by  Paul  even  in  his  Christian  brotherhoods,*  was  regarded  as  convey- 
ing involuntary  defilement  to  "those  who  eat  and  associate  with" 
the  offender.  This  belief  is  stated  in  so  many  words  by  the  Jewish 
Christian  writer  of  the  Clementine  Homilies,  "Fornication  and  adul- 
tery differ  from  all  other  sins,  in  that  they  defile  not  only  the  offender, 
but  those  also  that  eat  and  associate  with  him."  ^  Hermas,  writing  in 
Rome  about  130  A.D.,  has  the  same  idea:  "If  a  man  continue  in  such 
deeds  as  these  (adultery  and  sexual  impurity)  keep  away  from  him, 
and  live  not  with  him.  Otherwise  thou  also  art  a  partaker  of  his  sin."  ^ 
Paul  himself  insists  on  similar  exclusion  of  the  "fornicator,"  in  par- 
ticular from  table  fellowship.  He  had  written  to  the  Corinthians 
that  they  must  "have  no  company  with  fornicators."  They  either 
could  not  or  would  not  understand.  He  reiterates  with  emphasis 
that  with  such  an  one  they  must  "no,  not  so  much  as  eat."  "Every 
other  sin  is  without  the  body,"  but  "  He  that  is  joined  to  a  harlot  takes 
away  the  members  of  Christ  and  makes  them  the  members  of  a  harlot." 
Therefore  he  must  cease  to  be  a  "member"  of  the  Church  (i  Cor. 
5  :  9-13:  6  :  13-20).  In  respect,  then,  to  its  being  "  necessary  "  for 
the  protection  of  the  Jewish  Christian  in  Gentile  communities  against 
involuntary  contamination  from  "the  pollutions  of  idols"  there  is 

'  Gal.  5  :  20;    I  Thess.  4  :  3-8;    i  Cor.   ^  :  1-13;    10  :  7,  8:   Rom.  i  :  24-27; 
Eph.  5:5;   Col.  3  :  S.  6,  etc.        »  Clem,  Horn.  III.  68.        s  Mandate,  IV,  i. 


123 


APPENDED   NOTE   B 


nothing  out  of  keeping  with  the  rest  of  the  "decrees"  in  the  stipula- 
tion against  "fornication." 

Paul,  as  we  have  seen,  was  strenuous  in  checking  the  tendencies 
to  heathen  laxity  of  morals  in  his  churches,  urging  as  an  additional 
motive  the  scandal  caused  among  fellow-believers  by  their  indifiference. 
He  also  forbids  peremptorily  participation  in  heathen  banquets,  on 
the  ground  that  this  is  a  kind  of  "communion  with"  the  demon  wor- 
shipped. He  even  commands  abstinence  from  the  meat  placed  be- 
fore one  in  a  neighbor's  house  if  a  fellow-guest  whispers,  "  This  hath 
been  offered  to  an  idol."  However,  at  this  point  we  reach  an  end  of 
his  agreement  with  the  "decrees";  for  he  expressly  goes  on  to  point 
out  that  this  abstinence  from  "meat  sold  in  the  shambles"  is  not  a 
matter  of  requirement,  but  of  gracious  consideration  for  the  weaker 
conscience.  Abstinence  from  "blood"  and  "things  strangled"  is 
not  even  contemplated.  The  principle  which  governs  his  own  ordi- 
nary conduct  is  that  "there  is  nothing  unclean  of  itself."  Only  a 
timid  conscience  makes  any  food  religiously  objectionable ;  but  to 
avoid  leading  such  consciences  astray  he  himself  is  willing  to  abstain 
from  meat,  or  wine,  or  anything  else,  "  while  the  world  standeth." 

This  very  need  among  the  Corinthians  and  Romans  of  pointing 
out  what  is  lawful  and  what  is  not,  in  the  matter  of  "meats"  and  the 
"pollutions  of  idols,"  proves  that  here  at  least  the  Gentile  believers  had 
not  received  "the  decrees  for  to  keep.'*  Paul's  careful  distinction 
between  what  his  followers  must  do  as  of  right,  and  what  they  ought 
to  be  willing  to  do  out  of  brotherly  consideration,  shows  that  he  had 
not  bound  himself  and  would  not  bind  others  to  hard  and  fast  rules  of 
"touch  not,  taste  not,  handle  not."  Not  only,  then,  must  we  take 
in  the  strictest  sense  his  positive  declaration  that  the  Pillars  imposed 
no  conditions  whatever  on  their  indorsement  of  the  gospel  which  he 
preached  among  the  Gentiles  (Gal.  2  :  6-10),  but  we  must  regard 
his  insistence  on  Peter's  accommodating  his  Jewish  scruples  to  Gen- 
tile practice  in  the  matter  of  eating  together  at  Antioch,  as  precluding 
any  admission  by  Paul,  then  or  afterwards,  of  the  method  of  solving 
the  problem  of  fellowship  proposed  by  James,  Concessions  must 
be  made,  but  Paul  insists  that  the  Jews  must  make  them;  because  for 
them  to  stand  upon  legal  "cleanness"  is  to  build  up  again  the  wall 
of  partition  they  had  once  destroyed. 

After  all  there  is  nothing  incomprehensible  in  the  fact  that  Acts 
in  this  matter  of  the  modus  vivendi  between  Jewish  and  Gentile 
believers  should  go  the  way  of  Peter  and  Barnabas,  the  way  of  "  James 
and  the  elders,"  the  way  of  Jerusalem  and  Antioch,  and  not  the  way 
of  Paul.  With  Luke,  Peter  and  James  and  "the  apostles  and  elders" 
are  authority  infallible  and  absolute.  Paul's  authority  depends  upon 
theirs,  and  cannot  be  conceived  as  conflicting  with  it.  Moreover,  the 
"decrees"  are  far  from  being  an  invention  of  his  imagination.  The 
very  incongruity  of  their  address  with  the  situation  they  are  made 

124 


APPENDED   NOTE   B 


to  occupy  iri  his  narrative  gives  simultaneously  a  proof  of  their  au- 
thenticity and  an  indication  of  their  real  occasion. 

In  the  present  story  of  Acts  13  :  1-16  :  5  the  "decrees"  are  en- 
acted to  meet  the  particular  case  of  the  Galatian  churches,  and  are 
therefore  distributed  among  them  "for  to  keep."  But  in  the  letter 
itself  which  embodies  them  no  mention  whatever  is  made  of  the  Ga- 
latians,  but  they  are  explicitly  addressed  to  "the  brethren  which  are 
of  the  Gentiles  in  Antioch  and  Syria  and  Cilicia,"  the  region  affected 
by  the  "trouble"  before  the  return  of  Paul  and  Barnabas  from  the 
First  Missionary  Journey. 

We  have  seen  that  they  cannot  have  been  enacted  before  Peter's 
coming  to  Antioch.  Otherwise  his  vacillation  would  be  unaccount- 
able.^ On  the  contrary  they  meet  the  very  contingency  Peter  was 
there  facing.  They  apply  the  principle  of  the  compact  —  mutual 
non-interference  —  to  the  question  of  table-fellowship  in  a  manner 
contrary  to  the  Pauline,  which  Peter  had  previously  been  following. 
Nothing  stands  in  the  way  of  the  conclusion  that  these  "decrees" 
were  brought  by  the  delegation  "from  James,"  to  whose  coming  Paul 
attributes  the  origin  of  the  whole  disturbance  (Gal.  2  :  12). 

Aside  from  the  fact  that  Luke  brings  down  Paul  and  Barnabas  a 
second  time  from  Antioch  to  participate  in  his  great  Apostolic  Con- 
clave, and  postpones  to  it  what  really  —  as  his  own  account' confesses 
—  had  been  decided  "a  good  while  ago,"  the  account  of  Acts  15  :  1-35 
contains  but  little  that  might  not  correctly  describe  such  a  conclave. 
To  Luke,  of  course,  its  attempted  settlement  is  the  true  and  final  one. 
Instead  of  a  conflict  with  Peter  arising  out  of  it,  Paul  distributes  its 
decrees  among  his  Galatian  converts  for  to  keep,  and  quiets  the  op- 
position of  "  the  Jews  that  were  in  those  parts"  by  circumcising  Timo- 
thy,2  a  proof  that  "he  himself  walked  orderly  keeping  the  law." 

This  matter  of  the  Jerusalem  Council  and  its  decrees  permanently 
settling  the  Galatian  crisis  is  a  matter  of  immense  importance  to  the 
author  of  Acts.  He  not  only  makes  it  central  to  his  whole  "treatise," 
but  invokes  on  its  behalf  the  authority  of  the  entire  college  of  "the 
apostles  and  elders"  assembled  in  solemn  conclave  in  Jerusalem, 
and  prefaces  the  enactments  with  "  It  seemed  good  to  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  to  us."  If  ever  a  Christian  document  claimed  all  possible  sanc- 
tions of  apostolicity,  catholicity,  and  divine  inspiration,  it  is  this. 
Yet  it  seems  to  share  the  fate  of  all  the  ex  cathedra  utterances  for 
which  infallibility  is  claimed  with  greatest  vehemence.  They  seem 
doomed  to  come  into  the  world  still-born.  The  joint  attempt  of 
Antioch  and  Jerusalem  at  ecumenical  legislation  was  a  failure  from 

'  Even  Zahn  admits  that  Peter's  conduct  at  Antioch  would  be  "  scarcely  credible" 
after  the  enactment  of  the  decrees.  Kommentar,  1905,  p.  iii.  »  The  fact  itself 
is  rather  supported  than  made  incredible  by  Ga!.  ^  :  2,  3,  11.  It  is  the  suppression 
of  the  converse  case  of  the  refusal  to  circumcise  Titus,  and  the  interest  in  which  the 
fact  is  adduced,  which  makes  Acts  16  :  1-5  unhistorical.  See  above  on  Acts  21  : 
17-26,  p.  121. 

125 


APPENDED   NOTE   B 


the  start.  Luke  has  gone  to  extraordinary  lengths,  it  is  true,  to  make 
it  appear  that  Paul  also  accepted  the  principle  that  "the  Jews  which 
are  among  the  Gentiles"  are  under  obligation  to  keep  the  law,  and  that 
it  is  therefore  "necessary  "  for  their  sakes  that  Gentile  converts  " keep 
the  decrees."  To  give  color  to  this  view  he  transforms  the  whole  nature 
of  the  third  conference  in  Jerusalem,  an  interview  at  which  the  author 
of  the  Diary  was  himself  present. 

We  know  from  the  Epistles  that  Paul's  main  object  in  this  great 
delegation  from  all  the  churches  of  the  Gentiles  to  "James  and  the 
elders"  was  to  convey  his  "ministration"  which  he  had  on  their  be- 
half, and  that  he  was  asking  the  prayers  even  of  far-off  Roman  believers 
"that  it  might  be  acceptable  to  the  saints,"  and  that  his  life  might 
be  preserved  against  the  threats  of  the  "disobedient"  as  he  went 
to  convey  it.  It  was  his  olive  branch  on  behalf  of  a  free,  yet  brotherly 
Gentile  Christendom,  proving  the  loyalty  with  which  Paul  and  his 
followers  had  stood  by  the  compact  in  its  two  principles  of  mutual 
respect  and  brotherly  kindness.  We  know  too  from  the  Epistles 
that  Paul  peremptorily  opposed  the  later  inference  by  which  Jeru- 
salem undertook  to  say  what  concessions  were  "necessary"  from  the 
Gentiles.  He  even  laid  down  a  "must"  of  his  own  in  the  opposite 
sense.  The  Jews  must  make  the  concession,  else  they  would  be  "  coerc- 
ing the  Gentiles."  We  know  on  the  other  hand  from  the  Epistles 
that  Paul  could  and  did  engage  in  Jewish  rites  like  a  Jew  when  among 
Jews,  and  therefore  could,  and  probably  did,  engage  in  sacrifices  in 
the  temple  on  behalf  of  Jewish  Christian  Nazirites.  But  we  also 
know  that  if  he  did  so  it  was  to  prove  how  free  is  the  believing  Jew 
to  become  "all  things  to  all  men,  as  without  law  to  them  that  are 
without  law,"  as  well  as  "under  law  to  them  that  are  under  the  law." 
In  Acts  it  is  adduced  in  support  of  just  the  contrary  principle.  It 
exhibits  Paul  as  officially  showing  how  by  precept  and  example  he 
has  always  maintained  that  the  believing  Jew  is  not  free,  and  that 
because  he  is  not,  even  his  Gentile  fellow-Christian  must  in  some 
degree  be  "entangled  in  his  yoke  of  bondage." 

In  spite  of  these  sweeping  claims  for  their  ecumenical  authority 
and  acceptance,  the  Jerusalem  decrees  can  never  have  obtained 
currency  in  the  Pauline  churches.  Only  Jerusalem  could  have  been 
fatuous  enough  to  think  it  a  practicable  mode  of  settlement  of  the 
question  of  fellowship  to  demand  that  Gentile  tables  should  be  par- 
tially kosherized  throughout  the  world  for  the  benefit  of  the  Christian 
Jew.  Antioch  yielded,  as  we  know;  for  south  of  the  Cilician  Gates 
the  Jewish  element  in  the  churches  was  still  strong,  though  gradually 
weakening  as  the  preponderance  of  Gentile  converts  increased,  and 
the  Synagogue  drew  off  in  more  and  more  bitter  hostility.  North 
of  the  Taurus  range  the  Judaizers,  though  they  now  reverted  to  some- 
thing like  their  original  propaganda  of  circumcision  and  the  law, 
did  not  even  secure  the  compromise  of  the  four  decrees.    Galatia 

126 


APPENDED   NOTE  B 


appears  well  represented  in  the  Pauline  delegation  to  James,  and 
we  have  later  evidence  of  the  gradual  relaxation  of  the  Petrine  de- 
mands. About  85  to  90  A.D.  Luke  of  Antioch  in  Syria  still  thinks 
it  possible  to  enforce  the  decrees  of  James  in  the  Gentile  world.  But 
that  is  the  last  trace  we  have  of  the  attempt  to  prohibit  "things 
strangled"  and  "blood."  Even  the  Syrian  church  manual  of  about 
120  A.D.,  the  Teaching  of  the  Twelve  Apostles,  no  longer  insists  upon 
these.  "Concerning  foods  bear  what  thou  art  able"  is  its  direction 
to  the  catechumen;  but  with  decided  leaning  toward  the  rule  which 
we  find  subsequently  prevailing  among  the  Pauline  churches,  it  adds, 
"However,  abstain  by  all  means  from  meats  offered  to  idols,  for  it 
is  the  food  of  dead  gods."  Among  "the  churches  of  Asia"  in  95  a.d. 
we  find  the  stipulations  reduced  to  these  two,  which  in  substance 
really  had  the  indorsement  of  Paul.  Those  who  hold  "the  teaching 
of  Balaam"  who  led  Israel  to  commit  fornication  and  to  eat  things 
offered  to  idols"  are  denounced.  Upon  the  rest  the  Spirit  imposes 
"no  other  burden"  (Rev.  2  :  14,  20-24).  About  150  a.d.,  when  the 
Western  text  of  Acts  gained  currency,  the  "decrees"  were  revised 
by  the  elimination  of  the  prohibition  of  "things  strangled"  and  the 
addition  of  the  "golden  rule."  This  permitted  them  to  be  taken  as 
general  precepts  of  morality,  "blood"  being  interpreted  metaphoric- 
ally as  "violence"  or  "injury."  Thus  at  last,  with  the  disappearance 
of  the  Jewish  element  from  the  Church,  the  very  understanding  of 
the  "decrees"  disappears,  together  with  the  occasion  for  their  ex- 
istence. Neither  Paul's  solution  of  the  problem  of  fellowship  by 
concessions  on  the  Jewish  side,  nor  James'  by  concessions  from  the 
Gentile  side,  remains.  The  issue  in  the  second  century  is  no  longer 
between  Jewish  Christian  and  Gentile  Christian,  but  between  Chris- 
tian and  Jew,  or  Christian  and  heathen.  Hence  the  rule  now  becomes 
simply:  "Abstain  from  fornication,  it  is  a  heathen  vice  that  con- 
taminates the  whole  brotherhood.  Abstain  from  meats  offered  to 
idols,  it  is  the  food  of  dead  gods." 

Scarcely  less  significant  of  the  Lukan  point  of  view  than  this  mis- 
interpretation of  Paul's  attitude  at  the  Conference  with  James  in 
Acts  21  :  17-26  is  the  suppression  of  the  whole  matter  of  his  "minis- 
tration." It  is  not  merely  that  the  great  contribution  conveyed  by 
at  least  eight  delegates  of  the  Greek  churches  besides  Paul,  for  whose 
favorable  reception  Paul  entreats  the  prayers  of  the  Roman  Christians, 
is  ignored  by  Luke.  In  the  only  allusion  remaining  it  is  given  an 
entirely  different  significance.  In  his  speech  before  Felix,  Paul  is 
made  to  say:  "  I  came  to  bring  alms  to  my  nation  and  offerings." 
This  was  not  the  real  occasion  of  his  coming.  The  "ministration," 
on  the  other  hand,  which  was  the  real  occasion,  is  carried  back  to 
the  time  of  its  original  proposal  in  the  conference  of  Paul  and  Bar- 
nabas with  the  Pillars;  but  even  there  it  is  credited  to  the  account 
of  Antioch.    This,  taken  in  conjunction  with  the  description  of  An- 

.127 


APPENDED   NOTE   B 


tioch  as  the  first  Gentile  Christian  church,  the  note  that  it  was  there 
that  the  name  "  Christian  "  originated,  the  crediting  to  Antioch  of  the 
initiative  in  the  evangelization  of  the  whole  Gentile  world,  and  of 
what  Luke  considers  the  ecumenical  settlement  of  the  basis  of  fellow- 
ship, is  a  strong  confirmation  of  the  tradition  cited  by  Eusebius  of 
the  Antiochian  origin  of  "Luke."  The  view-point  which  we  have 
found  so  strikingly  in  contrast  with  that  of  Paul  can  now  define  itself. 
It  is  the  aspect  the  story  of  the  great  Galatian  crisis  presented  in 
Antioch  a  quarter  century  or  so  after  the  death  of  Paul.  On  the 
other  hand  the  letters  themselves  show  not  only  a  greater  crisis,  but 
a  greater  gospel  and  a  greater  man. 


138 


APPENDED   NOTE   C 

JUSTIFICATION    BY  FAITH,    "APART    FROM"   WORKS 
OF  LAW 

As  a  rule  it  forms  no  part  of  the  commentator's  province  to  justify, 
but  only  to  elucidate,  his  author.  But  much  of  the  misunderstanding 
of  Paul's  great  doctrine  of  Justification  by  faith  is  really  due  to  certain 
associations  of  ideas  connected  with  the  term  "justify,"  which  com- 
pel the  mind  to  question  its  validity.  The  validity  of  the  doctrine 
becomes  readily  apparent  when  we  cease  to  connect  with  this  term 
the  notion  of  a  judge,  and  connect  it  with  the  action  of  a  father. 
And  surely  not  to  Jesus  only,  but  to  Paul  also,  Father  is  the  more 
appropriate  name  for  God. 

To  "justify"  (spoken  of  God)  is  not  to  make  just,  and  is  not  merely 
(as  Judge)  to  declare  just  (acquit).  It  is  in  every  respect  (both  as 
Judge  and  as  Father)  to  treat  as  just.  "Faith"  is  the  attitude  of 
mind  corresponding  to  and  conditioning  this  fatherly  disposition  of 
God,  i.e.  filial  trust  and  obedience.  Without  it  God  cannot  be  just 
and  still  treat  as  just  the  ungodly.  This  is  the  heart  of  the  Pauline 
message.  John  the  prophet  preached  "repentance":  Turn  ye,  O 
Israel,  for  why  will  ye  die?  Jesus  the  Son  preached  "faith."  If 
ye  do  turn,  your  Father  may  be  trusted  always,  for  everything,  to 
the  uttermost.  Paul  the  theologian  preached  "justification":  an 
interpretation  of  the  significance  of  the  cross  as  the  central  factor 
in   the   divine   redemption. 

Once  the  term  "justification"  has  been  broadened  to  connote  the 
action  of  a  father  as  well  as  that  of  a  judge,  the  vindication  of  this 
Pauline  philosophy  of  redemption,  both  in  itself  and  as  a  true  corollary 
of  the  teaching  and  life  of  Jesus,  can  be  put  in  a  nutshell.  To  de- 
clare the  unjust  just  is  immoral,  no  matter  what  the  legal  fiction. 
To  treat  the  unjust  as  just  may  be  right  or  wrong,  wise  or  unwise, 
according  to  his  attitude  and  disposition. 

To  "treat  as  just"  the  man  who  has  only  "works,"  no  matter 
how  perfect,  is  superficial.  It  may  produce  an  immoral  result,  for 
the  motive  may  be  —  it  will  always  tend  to  be  —  mere  expediency. 
God,  therefore,  "who  looketh  upon  the  heart,"  does  not  "justify 
on  the  ground  of  works." 

K  129 


APPENDED   NOTE   C 


To  do  anything  less  than  "treat  as  just"  the  man  who  comes  to 
God  in  "faith,"  no  matter  how  imperfect  in  works,  would  be  un- 
righteous; for  the  disposition  of  filial  trust  and  obedience  will  in- 
evitably produce  the  works  in  good  time.  Therefore,  God,  whose 
treatment  of  men  is  determined  by  what  they  really  are,  or  may  be, 
and  not  by  what  they  have  done,  does  justify  "on  the  ground  of  faith 
apart  from  (choris)  works." 

The  problem  of  redemption  thus  reduces  simply  to  the  question 
how  to  produce  this  "faith."  To  Paul  it  is  the  cross  which  answers  it, 
just  as  the  very  existence  of  this  problem  itself  explains  the  necessity 
of  the  cross.  Reasoning  from  his  own  hopeless  struggle  under  the 
law  to  obtain  "a  righteousness  of  mine  own,  even  that  which  is  of 
the  law,"  Paul  believed  that  something  similar  to  his  own  self-con- 
demnation must  occur  in  the  moral  history  of  every  man,  even  Gen- 
tiles which  have  not  the  law  being  a  law  unto  themselves,  their  con- 
sciences, in  each  specific  action,  excusing  or  else  accusing  them. 
"Wherefore  thou  art  inexcusable,  O  man,  whosoever  thou  art."  To 
produce  the  sense  of  guilt  was  the  very  function  of  prescriptive  law. 
Given  in  a  deeper  and  ultimate  sense  "unto  life,"  Paul  himself 
had  found  it  "unto  death."  He  regards  it  therefore  as  given  pri- 
marily "for  the  sake  of  transgression"  —  yes,  even  as  provocative 
of  transgression.^  The  ministry  of  it,  therefore,  to  which  many 
alleged  ministers  of  Christ  were  giving  themselves  so  ardently,  was 
at  best  a  "ministry  of  condemnation."^ 

How,  then,  produce  faith?  This  was  the  work  of  God.  What 
the  law  could  not  do  in  that  it  was  weak  through  the  (inherent  in- 
capacity of  fallen)  flesh,  God  did,  by  sending  his  own  Son  in  the 
likeness  of  sinful  flesh,  and  (as  an  offering)  for  sin.  Men  would  not 
have  been  able  to  believe  in  the  wideness  of  God's  mercy  had  he  not 
"commended  his  own  love  toward  us  in  that  while  we  were  yet  sin- 
ners Christ  died  for  us."  ^  The  "ministry  of  reconciliation"  (atone- 
ment), therefore,  is  defined  very  carefully  to  be  this  work  of  God  in 
producing  faith  in  himself  in  hearts  reduced  to  moral  death  and  de- 
spair. Paul  compares  it  most  appropriately  to  the  raising  of  Christ 
from  physical  death.  It  was  Paul's  own  resurrection.  God  who 
(in  the  physical  creation)  caused  the  light  to  shine  out  of  darkness 
shines  in  our  hearts  to  give  the  light  of  the  knowledge  of  his  glory 
(i.e.  his  forgiving  love;  cf.  Ex.  S3  '-  i9~34  •  6)  in  the  face  of  Jesus 
Christ.* 

This,  then,  is  the  ministry  of  the  atonement:  "to  wit,  that  God  was 
in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  unto  himself,  not  reckoning  unto  them 
their  trespasses."  *  The  difficulties  in  the  way  of  forgiveness  over- 
come by  the  cross  are  indeed  twofold ;  but  the  root  of  both  is  in 
the  nature  of  man,  not  in  the  nature  of  God.    Man  is  (i)  incredulous 

I  Gal.  3  :  19-22  ;  Rom.  4  :  15  ;  7  :  7-15-  '  2  Cor.  3  :  6-11.  3  Rom.  4  :  18 
24;   5  :  6-10.       *  a  Cor.  4:6.       s  2  Cor.  5  :  14-21. 

130 


APPENDED   NOTE   C 


of  the  extent  of  God's  love;  (2)  disposed  to  accept  the  proof  of  it  as 
evidence  of  indulgent  laxity.  The  cross  meets  both.  Man's  dis- 
position is  changed  by  it,  not  God's.  "While  we  were  yet  weak," 
"while  we  were  enemies,"  we  were  "reconciled  to  God  through  the 
death  of  his  Son."  Also  when  God  "set  him  forth  in  his  blood,  to 
be  a  votive  offering  through  faith,"  he  "showed  his  own  righteous- 
ness, notwithstanding  his  forbearance  in  passing  over  sins  done  afore- 
time." For  in  the  great  cost  to  himself  of  this  means  of  redemption 
God  proved  himself  just  {i.e.  unswerving  in  his  determination  to 
produce  in  men  likeness  to  his  own  moral  perfectness),  while  he 
treated  as  just  him  that  had  faith  in  Jesus.^  Both  aspects  of  Paul's 
doctrine  of  the  cross  are  covered  in  the  single  statement:  "He  died 
for  all,  that  they  which  live  might  no  longer  live  unto  themselves,  but 
unto  him  who  for  their  sakes  died  and  rose  again."  ^  Paul's  "  ministry 
of  the  new  covenant,"  his  ambassadorial  message  of  reconciliation 
was  given  him  "when  it  pleased  God  to  manifest  his  Son  in"  the  last 
and  greatest  of  the  apostles.' 

I  Rom.  4  :  25-s  :  10;  3  :  21-26.    '  2  Cor.  s  :  15-     ^  Gal.  i  :  16;  cf.  2  Cor.  4  :  1-6; 
S  :  16-21. 


131 


INDEX 


Abraham,  73,  75,  79,  92 ;  inherit- 
ance of,  73,  85  ;  promise  to,  76, 
80. 

ACHAIA,  33. 

Acts,  9,  11,  16  f.,  38,  125. 

Adam,  84  f.;  Second,  115. 

Adeney,  26. 

Adoption,  85,  87  f.,  97. 

Allegory,  93. 

Analysis  (of  Gal.),  41  ff. 

Angels,  37,  80,  86,  89. 

Antioch,  Pisidian,  17  f.,  19,  21  flF.; 
Syrian,  13,  15  f.,  23,  29,  31,  33, 
38,  65,  120  £f.,  125,  127  f. 

Apocalyptic  Writers,  74. 

Apostles,  and  Elders,  13  f.,  124  fF.; 
False,  35. 

Apostleship,  II,  13,  15  f.,  47.  57, 

63- 

Apostolic  Council.  See  Jeru- 
salem Conclave. 

Arabia,  54. 

Aristides,  28. 

Assumptio  Mosis,  81. 

Athenagoras,  28. 

Atonement,  48,  130. 

Authorship  (of  Gal.),  7  fF. 

Bacon   {Story    of  St.    Paul),    28; 

(Journ.  of  TheoL),  38. 
Baptism,  83. 
Barnabas,  13,  15  flf.,  24,  29,  32  ff., 

58. 
Bauer,  9. 
Baur,  9. 

Bibliography,  42  ff. 
Bithynia,  18. 


Blood,  eating  of,  123  ff. 
Bousset,  21. 
Brethren,  33;  false,  61. 

Calendar,  37,  88. 

Canonicity,  4  ff. 

Cephas,  29,  34,  65. 

Christ  Party,  35. 

Church,  53. 

Churches  of  Galatia,  18  ff.,  24,  38, 

125- 
Circumcision,  31,  96  ff.,  109,  119; 

of  Timothy,  98,  125  ;  of  Titus, 

60. 
Clement  of  Rome,  5,  8  f. 
Clementine  Homilies,  36,  123. 
Codices,  2. 

COLOSSIANS,  26  f. 
Communicate,  109. 
Contributions,  22. 
Corinth,  26,  29,  32,  34,  37. 
Covenant,  79,  93. 
Cybele,  priests  of,  99. 
Cyprus,  17,  34. 

Damascus,  54. 

Decrees  of  Jerusalem,  40,  122  ff. 

Derbe,  7,^. 

Devout  Persons,  31. 

Diary  of  Acts,  9,  12,  119. 

Diatribe,  28. 

Diognetus,  Ep.  to,  28. 

Dissimulation  of  Peter,  65. 

Elements  of  the  world,  86,  89. 
Enemy  (epithet  of  Paul),  91. 
Ephesians,  26  f. 


133 


INDEX 


Ephesus,  i8  ff. 

Conclave,  12,  17,  38,  40;    de- 

ESCHATOLOGY, 49, 

crees,  122  £F.;  visits,  16,  23,  29, 

EsDRAS,  Second,  85. 

32,  55,  57. 
Jesus  (as  Lord),  116. 

Faith,  70,  129  f. 

John,  62  f. 

Fornication,  123  f.,  127. 

(Gospel),  7. 

Freedom,  96,  10 1. 

JosEPHUs  (Antiquities),  80,  118. 

Freer  Manuscript,  3. 

Judaizers,  22  f.,  28  f.,  31,  33  ff., 
38,  96,  126. 

GAIUS,  32. 

Justification,  67,  129  flF. 

Galatia,  19,  24;  Paul's  visits 

to. 

Justin  Martyr,  6,  8,  10. 

38. 

Galatians  (people),  24,  29 

.31- 

Kerygmas,  28. 

(letter),    text,     1-4;    canonicity, 

Kosher  Meats,  122. 

4-7 ;  authorship,  7-1 1 ; 

internal 

evidence,    8,    29;     relation 

to 

Law,   works  of,    68,   77,  80  f.,  83, 

Acts,  11;  to  whom  written. 

17; 

97,  99,  102,  106. 

date,  25,    29;   relation 

to 

Ro- 

Letters  of  Commendation,  37. 

mans,  26  S. 

Lightfoot,   7,   20,   26,  81   f.,   83, 

Geography  of  Paul,  24. 

99. 

Gilbert  (Acts),  11  f. 

Luke,  13  £F.,  19,  40,  118  £F.,  127. 

Glorying,  106,  109. 

Luther,  41. 

Gospel  of  Paul,  11,  13,  15 

,47, 

5°, 

Lycaonia,  18,  20. 

52,   107,   115   S.;   of 

circum- 

Lystra,  20,  22,  7,^. 

cision,  121. 

Macedonia,  21  f.,  29,  ^^. 

Hagar,  93. 

Man-pleaser,  51. 

Harnack,  13, 

Marcion,  I,  4,  6,  10,  61,  82. 

Heir,  88. 

Mark,  17. 

Helena  of  Adiabene,  122. 

Meats,  distinctions  of,  120,  122. 

Hermas,  123. 

Mediator,  81. 

HiLLEL,   102. 

Ministration  (at  Jerusalem),  40, 

Holtzmann  (H.  J.),  27. 

64,  126  f. 
Miracles,  75. 

ICONIUM,  25. 

Missionary  Journey,  First,  17  flf.. 

Ignatius,  5,  7,  9. 

21,  32,  121  f.;    Second,  18,  21, 

Isaac,  92,  95. 

n- 

Isaiah,  94. 

Moses,  81,  84,  122. 

Isaian  Apocalypse,  28. 

Muratorian  Fragment,  2. 

Ishmael,  92,  95. 

Mysla.,  20. 

Israel  of  God,  no. 

Mystic  Union  with  Christ,  70. 

James  (of  Jerusalem),  13  f. 

33, 

35, 

North  Galatia,  20. 

55,  62,  65,  118  flF. 

North  Galatian  Theory,  20  £F. 

Jerome,  118. 

Jerusalem,  Compact,  32, 

118 

ff.; 

Order  of  Events,  38  ff. 

134 


INDEX 


Papyri  (magic),  89. 

Paul,  apostleship  and  gospel,  11,  13, 

15  f-,  47,  57;    early  career,  15, 

55;     illness,    21,   90;     charged 

with  dishonesty,  37. 
Paid  and  Thekla,  25. 
Persecution,  95,  109. 
Peter,   13,   15,  25,  29,  34  f.,  63, 

118  ff. 
Peter,  Preaching  of,  28. 
Philo  (Viia  Mosis),  81,  95. 
Phrygia,  18  £F.,  24. 
Phrygo-Galatic  Region,  25. 
Pillars  (at  Jerusalem),  29,  38,  40, 

59,  64,  118  flF. 
PiSIDIA,  18. 

Pliny,  25. 

POLYCARP,  6  f. 

Postscript,  108. 
Practical  Exhortation,  ioi. 
Psalms  of  Solomon,  5 1 . 
Ptolemy,  25. 

Ramsay,  19. 

Revelation  (to  Paul),  52,  59. 

Rome,  12,  29. 

Rudiments.     See  Elements. 

Sabbatizing,  90. 

Seed  of  Abraham,  80,  85. 

Silas  (Silvanus),  17,  30,  33. 

Simon  Magus,  36. 

Sinai,  93. 

Sorcery,  104. 

Spirit,  gift  of,  73;  doctrine  of,  102. 


Spiritual  persons,  104. 

Spitta,  27. 

Steck,  7,  21,  26  f. 

Stoicism,  115. 

Stoics,  82,  102  f. 

Subscriptions,  hi. 

Synagogue,  31,  126. 

Syria  and  Cilicia,  56,  122,  125. 

Tacitus,  25. 

Tatian,  28. 

Teaching  of  the  Twelve,  48,  66,  127. 

Tertullian,  61. 

Thessalonians,  28,  32. 

Timothy,  19,  22,  30,  2,Z^  125. 

Titus,  14,  58. 

Tongues,  87,  103. 

Troas,  22. 

Van  Manen,  27. 

Visits    of    Paul,    to    Galatia,  90; 
to  Jerusalem,  16,  23,  29,  32,  55, 

57.  121  f- 
Volter,  27. 

Warfield  (Journ.  of  Bihl.  Lit.),  15. 
Weak  Brethren,  30,  34,  62. 
Western  Text,  2. 
Wisdom  of  Solomon,  69,  117. 
Wisdom  Writers,  74,  117. 
Works  of  Law,  68,  129. 
World-rulers,  86  f. 

Zahn,  32  f.,  82,  92,  125. 
Zealots,  53. 


135 


The  Bible  for 
Home  and  School 


SHAILER  MATHEWS,  General  Editor 


HEBREWS 

By  E.  J.  GOODSPEED 

ACTS 

By  George  H.  Gilbert 

GALATIANS 

By  B.  W.  Bacon 

GENESIS 

By  H.  G.  Mitchell 

I  SAMUEL 

By  L.  W.  Batten 

PSALMS 

By  J.  P.  Peters 

ISAIAH 

By  John  E.  McFadyen 

AMOS,  HOSEA,  and  MICAH 

By  J.  M.  P.  Smith 

JOHN 

By  Shailer  Mathews 

ROMANS 

By  E.  I.  BoswoRTH 

EPHESIANS  and  COLOSSIANS 

By  Gross  Alexander 


JO  cents ;  by  mail,  jj  cents 

75  cents ;  by  mail^  82  cents 

Now  ready 

Now  ready 

In  preparation 

In  preparation 

In  preparation 

In  preparation 

In  preparation 

In  preparation 

In  preparation 


The  chief  characteristics  of  the  new  series  are  its  use  of  the  Revised  Version 
in  1881,  its  exclusion  of  all  processes  from  the  notes,  the  briefness  of  its  expla- 
nations, and  its  general  sympathy  with  the  best  that  is  in  modern  Bible  study. 


THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

64-^6  FIFTH  AVENTJE,  NEW  YOBK 


NEW  TESTAMENT  HANDBOOKS 

Each  $1.00  net 

EDITED   BY 

SHAILER  MATHEWS 

Professor  of  New   Testament  History  and  Interpretation, 
University  of  Chicago 

The  History  of  the  Textual  Criticism  of  the  New  Testament 

Prof.  Marvin  R.  Vincent,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Exegesis,  Union 

Theological  Seminary. 

Professor  Vincent's  contributions  to  the  study  of  the  New  Testament  rank  him 
among  the  first  American  exegetes.  His  most  recent  publication  is  "A  Critical 
and  Exegetical  Commentary  on  the  Epistles  to  the  PhiHppians  and  to  Philemon" 
("  International  Critical  Commentary  "),  which  was  preceded  by  a  "Students'  New 
Testament  Handbook,"  "  Word  Studies  in  the  New  Testament,"  and  others. 

The  History  of  the  Higher  Criticism  of  the  New  Testament 

Prof  Henry  S.  Nash,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Interpretation,  Cam- 
bridge Divinity  School. 
Of  Professor  Nash's  "  Genesis  of  the  Social  Conscience,"  The  Outlook  said : 
"The  results  of  Professor  Nash's  ripe  thought  are  presented  in  a  luminous,  com- 
pact, and  often  epigrammatic  style.  The  treatment  is  at  once  masterful  and  help- 
ful, and  the  book  ought  to  be  a  quickening  influence  of  the  highest  kind  ;  it  surely 
will  establish  the  fame  of  its  author  as  a  profound  thinker,  one  from  whom  we  have 
a  right  to  expect  future  inspiration  of  a  kindred  sort." 

Introduction  to  the  Books  of  the  New  Testament 

Prof  B.  WisNER  Bacon,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Interpretation,  Yale 
University. 
Professor  Bacon's  works  in  the  field  of  Old  Testament  criticism  include  "  The 
Triple  Tradition  of  Exodus,"  and  "  The  Genesis  of  Genesis,"  a  study  of  the  docu- 
mentary sources  of  the  books  of  Moses.  In  the  field  of  New  Testam.ent  study  he 
has  published  a  number  of  brilliant  papers,  the  most  recent  of  which  is  "  The 
Autobiography  of  Jesus,"  in  the  American  Journal  of  Theology. 

The  History  of  New  Testament  Times  in  Palestine 

Prof.  Shailer  Mathews,  Professor  of  New  Testament  History  and  Inter- 
pretation, The  University  of  Chicago. 
The  Congregationalist  says  of  Prof.  Shailer  Mathews's  "  The  Social  Teaching 
of  Jesus" :  "  Re-reading  deepens  the  impression  that  the  author  is  scholarly,  devout, 
awal^e  to  all  modern  thought,  and  yet  conservative  and  preeminently  sane.  If, 
after  reading  the  chapters  dealing  with  Jesus'  attitude  toward  man,  society,  the 
family,  the  state,  and  wealth,  the  reader  will  not  agree  with  us  in  this  opinion,  we 
greatly  err  as  prophets."  

THE   MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

64-66  FIFTH  AVENUE,  NEW  YORK 


NEW  TESTAMENT  HANDBOOKS  —  Cbn^mf/e<f 


The  Teaching  of  Jesus 

Prof.    George    B.     Stevens,     Professor    of    Systematic    Theology,    Yale 
University. 

Professor  Stevens's  volumes  upon  "The  Johannine  Theology,"  "The  Pauline 
Theology,"  as  well  as  his  recent  volume  on  "  The  Theology  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment," have  made  him  probably  the  most  prominent  writer  on  biblical  theology  in 
America.    His  new  volume  will  be  among  the  most  important  of  his  works. 

The  Biblical  Theology  of  the  New  Testament 

Prof.  E.  P.  Gould,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Interpretation,  Protestant 
Episcopal  Divinity  School,  Philadelphia. 

Professor  Gould's  Commentaries  on  the  Gospel  of  Mark  (in  the  "  International 
Critical  Commentary")  and  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  (in  the  "American 
Commentary  ")  are  critical  and  exegetical  attempts  to  supply  those  elements  which 
are  lacking  in  existing  works  of  the  same  general  aim  and  scope. 

"  An  excellent  series  of  scholarly,  yet  concise  and  inexpensive  New  Testament 
handbooks." —  Christian  Advocate,  New  York. 

"These  books  are  remarkably  well  suited  in  language,  style,  and  price,  to  all 
students  of  the  New  Testament." —  The  Congregationalist,  Boston. 


Also  by  Shailer  Mathews 
The  Church  and  the  Changing  Order 

"  A  most  interesting  and  valuable  contribution  to  the  literature  of  a  subject 
that  is  growing  in  popular  attention  every  day.  While  among  the  deeply, 
really  religious  and  genuinely  scientific  there  is  no  conflict  or  antagonism 
where  even  there  is  not  accord,  this  unfortunately  is  not  commonly  the  case 
among  the  masses  who  have  only  caught  the  forms  of  religious  and  scientific 
knowledge  without  their  spirit.  This  book  is  addressed  much  more  it  seems 
to  the  religious  than  the  scientific,  possibly  because  the  latter  have  the  less 
need  for  repentance.  Those  who  are  troubled  in  any  way  at  the  seeming 
conflict  between  the  demands  of  faith,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  experiences 
of  their  own  reason  and  the  problems  of  modern  social  and  industrial  life 
will  find  here  much  sage,  illuminating,  and  practical  counsel."  —  Evening 
Post. 

Cloth^  i2mo,  $i.jo  net 

THE   MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

64-66  FIFTH  AVENUE,  NEW  YOBK 


Complete  in  one  volume,  printed  in  clear  type  on  Croxley  Mills  Bible 
paper,  attractively  bound  in  cloth  or  leather,  with  gilt  top  and  title. 


THE 

Modern  Reader^s  Bible 

The  Sacred  Scriptures  Presented  in 
Modem  Literary  Form 

Edited,  with  an  Introduction  and  Notes, 
by  Richard  G.  Moulton,  M.A.,  Ph.D. 

Olive  green  cloth,  gilt  top,  $2.00  net ;  by  mail,  $2.17.     Limp 
morocco,  round  corners,  full  gilt,  $J.oo  net  /    by  mail,  $j.i7. 


"The  *  Modern  Reader's  Bible '  is  altogether  admirable  and  of  special 
value."  — Henry  C.  Potter,  Bishop  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church, 

"To  the  student,  and  to  all  persons  who  relish  truth  in  its  finest 
form  of  expression,  it  is  a  positive  boon."  —  John  F.  Hurst,  Bishop 
of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 

"  I  look  for  a  large  increase  of  interest  in  the  Bible,  for  a  much 
better  understanding  of  its  general  spirit  and  teaching,  and  especially 
for  an  increased  appreciation  of  its  inspirational  power,  from  the 
publication  of  the  'Modern  Reader's  Bible.'"  —  Lyman  Abbott, 
Editor  The  Outlook. 


PUBLISHED  BY 

THE   MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

64-66  FIFTH  AVENUE,  NEW  YORK 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY, 

BERKELEY 

THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 

STAMPED  BELOW 

Books  not  returned  on  time  are  subject  to  a  fine  of 
50c  per  volume  after  the  third  day  overdue,  increasing 
to  $1.00  per  volume  after  the  sixth  day.     Books  not  in 
demand  may  be  renewed  if  application  is  made  before 
expiration  of  loan  period. 

JAM  31  ■^■-'' 

^^'^  20.1929 

28Maj!62fa 

-  c>  LD 

mio'u-M 

20m-ll,'20 

L        A  YB  2797 f 


235418 


